The authors offer ways to encourage and educate Americans to participate in the public deliberations that make democracy work and lay out the principles of..

This book makes a significant contribution to the tradition of liberal political theory: it explores the foundations and limits of the idea of equality within that theory and offers a sustained argument for a persuasive new view of liberalism. Liberal thinking has always displayed a tension between the claims of liberty and those of equality. Professor Gutmann examines the contributions of liberal theorists from Locke to Rawls on the subject of two kinds of equality - equality of opportunity to (...) participate and the equal distribution of economic goods. Valuing both, she shows that, far from being alternatives, the two ideals are compatible to a much greater degree than has previously been thought. Liberal Equality restores egalitarianism to political theory in a way that will forcefully challenge its critics to deeper reflection. (shrink)

I doubt that even one of her readers will agree with all of Gutmann's conclusions--but they will all have to take account of the wealth of empirical evidence and stringent reasoning in this book.

Ist Leben mehr als eine Leistung „natürlicher Systeme“? Wie unterscheiden sich Lebewesen von Artefakten? Lassen sich Lebewesen genauso herstellen wie Maschinen? Diese Fragen werden mit dem Siegeszug der „converging technologies“ besonders dringlich, denn je mehr Biologie, Ingenieurswissenschaften, Informatik und Physik zusammenfinden, desto weniger scheinen gewohnte Unterscheidungen zu treffen. Doch zeigt eine systematische Rekonstruktion der Lebenswissenschaften in ihrer aktuellen Form als Systembiologie und synthetische Biologie, daß es sich dabei um ein Selbstmissverständnis der Logik wissenschaftlicher Darstellung handelt. Eine alternative Auffassung der begrifflichen (...) Struktur unserer Rede über Lebendiges ist Anliegen dieses Buches. Leben ist danach eine Formbestimmung von Tätigkeitsverhältnissen, die sowohl theoretische wie praktische Begründungen ermöglicht. Die Entfaltung der spezifisch technischen Form dieses Wissens über das Lebendige gestattet es nicht nur, szientistische Verkürzungen zu vermeiden, sondern zudem den methodischen Ort wissenschaftlicher Strukturierungen von Lebendigem auszuzeichnen. Auf dieser Grundlage wird schließlich auch „der Menschen“ durch Lebenswissenschaften darstellbar – und zwar so, wie es der historischen Form des Gegenstandes angemessen ist. (shrink)

The most widely debated conception of democracy in recent years is deliberative democracy--the idea that citizens or their representatives owe each other mutually acceptable reasons for the laws they enact. Two prominent voices in the ongoing discussion are Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson. In Why Deliberative Democracy?, they move the debate forward beyond their influential book, Democracy and Disagreement.What exactly is deliberative democracy? Why is it more defensible than its rivals? By offering clear answers to these timely questions, (...) class='Hi'>Gutmann and Thompson illuminate the theory and practice of justifying public policies in contemporary democracies. They not only develop their theory of deliberative democracy in new directions but also apply it to new practical problems. They discuss bioethics, health care, truth commissions, educational policy, and decisions to declare war. In "What Deliberative Democracy Means," which opens this collection of essays, they provide the most accessible exposition of deliberative democracy to date. They show how deliberative democracy should play an important role even in the debates about military intervention abroad.Why Deliberative Democracy? contributes to our understanding of how democratic citizens and their representatives can make justifiable decisions for their society in the face of the fundamental disagreements that are inevitable in diverse societies. Gutmann and Thompson provide a balanced and fair-minded approach that will benefit anyone intent on giving reason and reciprocity a more prominent place in politics than power and special interests. (shrink)

Who should have the authority to shape the education of citizens in a democracy? This is the central question posed by Amy Gutmann in the first book-length study of the democratic theory of education. The author tackles a wide range of issues, from the democratic case against book banning to the role of teachers' unions in education, as well as the vexed questions of public support for private schools and affirmative action in college admissions.

In Kentucky Association of Health Plans, Inc. v. Miller,, the Supreme Court unanimously held that states’ “any willing provider” laws are not preempted by the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974. The Court ruled that states can regulate their health maintenance organizations, and thus upheld a Kentucky law that requires insurers to reimburse services of any health care provider who is willing and able to meet established criteria. The Supreme Court has heard several cases related to ERISA in the (...) last few years, and other such cases are working their way through the court system. Coupled with this most recent decision in Miller, the Supreme Court may significantly alter the shape of the insurance industry. (shrink)

An incisive examination of bioethics and American healthcare, and their profound affects on American culture over the last sixty years, from two eminent scholars. An eye-opening look at the inevitable moral choices that come along with tremendous medical progress, Everybody Wants to Go to Heaven but Nobody Wants to Die is a primer for all Americans to talk more honestly about health care. Beginning in the 1950s when doctors still paid house calls but regularly withheld the truth from their patients, (...) Amy Gutmann and Jonathan D. Moreno explore an unprecedented revolution in health care and explain the problem with America’s wanting everything that medical science has to offer without debating its merits and its limits. The result: Americans today pay far more for health care while having among the lowest life expectancies and highest infant mortality of any affluent nation. Gutmann and Moreno—“incisive, influential, and pragmatic thinkers” (Arthur Caplan)—demonstrate that the stakes have never been higher for prolonging and improving life. From health care reform and death-with-dignity to child vaccinations and gene editing, they explain how bioethics came to dominate the national spotlight, leading and responding to a revolution in doctor-patient relations, a burgeoning world of organ transplants, and new reproductive technologies that benefit millions but create a host of legal and ethical challenges. With striking examples, the authors show how breakthroughs in cancer research, infectious disease, and drug development provide Americans with exciting new alternatives, yet often painful choices. They address head-on the most fundamental challenges in American health care: Why do we pay so much for health care while still lacking universal coverage? How can medical studies adequately protect individuals who volunteer for them? What’s fair when it comes to allocating organs for transplants in truly life-and-death situations? A lucid and provocative blend of history and public policy, this urgent work exposes the American paradox of wanting to have it all without paying the price. (shrink)

Amy Gutmann argues that a just society could not, pace Michael Walzer, distribute social goods in accordance with the standards of complex equality. To support this view, Gutmann points to conflicts between multiple meanings of goods, which require adjudication in accordance with moral considerations that cut across distributive spheres. Drawing on the several meanings of productive employment and medical care in contemporary USA, she concludes that justice is complex, but not specific to distinct spheres.

"This collection of essays is the best one-volume introduction to a timely topic: the nature, purposes, moral justifications of (and limitations on) freedom of association in liberal democracies.

Although the root meaning of democracy is simple – ‘rule by the people’ from the fifth‐century bc Greek demokratia – and democracy is almost universally commended in contemporary politics, the ideal of democracy is complex and contested, as are its justifications and practical implications. Democracy is sometimes identified narrowly with majority rule and other times broadly to encompass all that is humanly good, but neither view is adequate to an understanding of democracy as a social ideal. Majoritarian decision making may (...) be a presumptive means of democratic rule, but it cannot be a sufficient democratic standard. Other standards – concerning who rules, by what procedures, over what matters, within what limits, and with what degree of deliberation – have from the beginning been implicated in the ideal of democracy as rule by the people, and continue to be entailed by the public aspirations of democratic and democratizing societies. (shrink)

The concept of form belongs—apparently—to an older stage of biological concept formation. Paradoxically, it is even the insistence on the reference to form that shows its very disappearance.1 The more the functionalization2, systematization, and finally algorithmization of modern biology3 advances, in the sense of systems biology, synthetic biology and bioinformatics, the less audible the call for a rehabilitation of the concept of form becomes.This technomorphic tendency, to deal with living entities in terms of artifacts, increasingly brought the concept of transformation (...) into the forefront—articulated, e.g., in the formal sense by differential equations and their combination on all “levels” of the biological... (shrink)

Tous les théoriciens de la démocratie ont à confronter le problème fondamental qui consiste à trouver une façon moralement justifiable de prendre des décisions collectives contraignantes face à des désaccords moraux persistants. Une théorie délibérative de la démocratie nous fournit l’approche la mieux défendable de ce problème parce qu’elle laisse ouverte la possibilité que les valeurs morales exprimées par un large éventail de théories puissent être justifiables. Le principe fondamental de notre théorie délibérative est que les citoyens doivent se justifier (...) réciproquement les lois qu’ils s’imposent mutuellement. Les citoyens ou leurs représentants offrent des raisons les uns aux autres dans un processus permanent de justification mutuelle. Les principes qui guident ce processus sont provisoires moralement et politiquement et permettent donc la persistance du désaccord moral à propos de lois, de politiques et d’institutions tout en ouvrant la possibilité de l’accord moral sur les lois, politiques et institutions qui sont mutuellement justifiables.All democratic theorists confront the fundamental problem of finding a morally justifiable way of making binding collective decisions in the face of continuing moral disagreement. A deliberative theory of democracy provides the most defensible approach to this problem because it leaves open the possibility that the moral values expressed by a wide range of theories may be justifiable. The fundamental principle of our deliberative theory is that citizens owe one another justifications for the laws they collectively impose on one another. Citizens or their accountable representatives offer reasons to one another in an ongoing process of mutual justification. The principles that guide this process are morally and politically provisional, and thus allow for the persistence of moral disagreement about laws, policies, and institutions, and at the same time for the possibility of moral agreement about those that are mutually justifiable. (shrink)

In Saks v. Franklin Covey Co., the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that the American with Disabilities Act, Title VII of Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Pregnancy Discrimination Act, and New York state law do not proscribe an employer's self-insured employee health plan from excluding surgical impregnation procedures from its coverage. Although the court found that infertility qualifies as a disability under the ADA, it restricted required coverage of certain infedty treatments.Title I of the ADA prohibits (...) an employer from discriminating on the basis of disability “in regard to … fringe benefits available by virtue of employment, whether or not administered by the covered entity.” The ADA defines “disability” as “a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities.” In Bragdon v. Abbott, the U.S. Supreme Court found that reproduction was a major life activity under the ADA. (shrink)

ZusammenfassungIn diesem Aufsatz gehe ich der Frage nach, ob der Staat von Migrant*innen fordern darf, sich zu integrieren. Nach einer Erläuterung des Begriffs „Integration“ und der verschiedenen Dimensionen der Integration werde ich ein Argument vorstellen, das zeigt, dass sich auf Grundlage des politischen Liberalismus eine staatliche Forderung nach politischer Partizipation von Migrant*innen begründen lässt. Diese Forderung beruht auf Gerechtigkeits- sowie demokratietheoretischen Überlegungen. Weil die politische Partizipation zugleich eine gewisse strukturelle, soziale und identifikative Integration der Migrant*innen voraussetzt, erstreckt sich die Forderung (...) auch auf diese Voraussetzungen. Da sich die entsprechende Forderung gleichermaßen an Migrant*innen als auch an Einheimische richtet, entgeht die hier vorgestellte Argumentation dem Vorwurf, auf einem bloß partikularen Interesse der einheimischen Bevölkerung zu beruhen, dass sich die Migrant*innen der bzw. einer nationalen Kultur anpassen mögen. Zuletzt diskutiere ich einen Einwand, der sich gegen eine der Prämissen meiner Argumentation richtet. Dieser lautet, dass ein liberaler Staat keinen Einfluss auf die Haltungen und Überzeugungen seiner Bürger*innen nehmen darf. Ich verteidige die Behauptung, dass es auch im liberalen Staat legitim ist, die Bürger*innen zur Demokratie zu erziehen. (shrink)

This chapter contains sections titled: Multiple Educational Aims and Authorities Vouchers, Parental Choice, and Public Voice Curricular Controversies in a Multicultural Society Educating Cosmopolitans or Patriots? Affirmative Action, Academic Freedom, and Higher Education Democracy, Democratic Education, and Deliberation Acknowldgements.

This book examines the well-covered subject of leadership from a unique perspective: history's vast catalogue of leadership successes and failures. Through a collection of highly compelling case studies spanning two millennia, it looks beyond the classic leadership parable of men in military or political crises and shows that successful leadership cannot be reduced to simplistic formulae. Written by experts in the field and based on rigorous research, each case provides a rich and compelling account that is accessible to a wide (...) audience, from students to managers. Rather than serving as a vehicle for advancing a particular theory of leadership, each case invites readers to reflect, debate and extract their own insights. (shrink)