Service interruption on Monday 11 July from 12:30 to 13:00: all the sites of the CCSD (HAL, EpiSciences, SciencesConf, AureHAL) will be inaccessible (network hardware connection).
Skip to Main content Skip to Navigation
Preprints, Working Papers, ...

article (C-4) Sociétés multi-communautaires Du débat passionné à l'arbitrage

Abstract : This article is based on a Master 2 thesis. The general introduction evokes four current subjects (Conception of human life, status of women, distinctive signs of a religion, food) which have given rise to many debates showing the diversity of approaches and even of world views of different communities that are expressed. The theoretical approach addresses three topics: (1-) the affections causing the most intense affects, (2-) organisations and communities, (3-) the different "deliberations". This approach leads to proposals for rules of arbitration in deliberations, whether they are formally organised or impromptu in everyday life. This approach is made taking into account the results of subsequent work to the original dissertation, based on articles (B-1) and (B-2) summarised in the theses to be mobilised for any empirical research in social sciences. In the cited dissertation and in this article, this approach mobilises Rawls, Habermas and Ch. Taylor (see also article (D-3) Discussion with Rawls, Habermas). The conclusion of this theoretical approach is that any deliberation between different communities in the same state must be based on the following prior premises, premises or original position that must be agreed upon: a multi-community society in which the dominant community, the one that seems to have inspired the most legislation (constitution, fundamental rights, written or unwritten laws and rules, etc.), has no more prerogatives than the others, Habermasian deliberation (this procedure allows any subject to be discussed and the decisions taken have a "weak transcendence ") with all the stakeholders: any community accepts (1-) this democratic procedure, (2-) to be non-essentialist and not to have prejudices, including essentialist ones, about other communities, Deliberation if possible reasonable, each having HIS reason with his premises, by implementing a deliberation process taking into account this plurality of reasons and thus of possible conflicts on a given subject (see Appendix: Habermasian deliberation between multiple reasons), with, given the confrontation of multiple reasons on the subject to be discussed and the conflicts to be managed a necessary determination and approval by all communities of the prioritisation between spheres in which the premises of each one's reasons are expressed: (1-) of what is perceived as the necessity of one's nature and nature, (2-) of belonging2, (3-) of rights considered fundamental, (4-) of the "sacred", (5-) of moral statements, (6-) of social respect, and an application of the following prioritisation rule: any decision about a dispute in one sphere (e.g. the sphere of the 'sacred') must concern that sphere or a lower priority sphere but must not have negative effects in a higher priority sphere (sphere of fundamental rights, belonging, necessities of its nature), e.g. 'blasphemy' must not lead to criminal conviction, exclusion from one's community or death, Finally, this article presents examples of arbitration, on the four topics mentioned in the general introduction as well as on refugees-immigrants, based on this prior consensus and on our thesis.
Document type :
Preprints, Working Papers, ...
Complete list of metadata
Contributor : andre moulin Connect in order to contact the contributor
Submitted on : Wednesday, January 5, 2022 - 6:56:04 PM
Last modification on : Friday, March 4, 2022 - 9:30:47 AM
Long-term archiving on: : Wednesday, April 6, 2022 - 6:16:14 PM


article (C-4) Sociétés multi...
Files produced by the author(s)


  • HAL Id : hal-03494646, version 1


Andre Moulin. article (C-4) Sociétés multi-communautaires Du débat passionné à l'arbitrage. 2022. ⟨hal-03494646⟩



Record views


Files downloads