Liberal Justification
A Typology
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6353333 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Selina Chen |
| Year | 1998 |
| Volume | 18 |
| Issue | 3 |
| Pages | 189-196 |
| Publication date | 1998-09-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Politics (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0032-3268 • E-ISSN: 1467-9256 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publications Inc (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1111/1467-9256.00077 |
| OpenAlex | W2094440796 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 2 |
| References cited | 9 |
Contemporary liberalism exhibits a broad agreement among its proponents as to its content but widespread disagreement on what fundamental values justify its principles. This paper provides a typology of ways in which liberals approach the task of justifying liberalism. It sets out a fourfold typology for categorising different liberal theories by distinguishing between the various reasons why liberals reject or accept neutrality. Such a typology is helpful in showing exactly how and where liberal theories differ in their approaches to the issues of justification, neutrality and pluralism, and in showing where their strengths and weaknesses lie
Classical liberalism · Dilemma · Economics · Epistemology · Law and economics · Liberalism · Neutrality · Pluralism (philosophy · Political science · Politics · Positive economics · Sociology · Strengths and weaknesses · Typology · American Constitutional Law and Politics · Law · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics
| Unique citing works | 2 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,11 |
| Citation span | 2008 - 2024 (17) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 2 |