Notice bibliographique
Résumé
AbstractWhat normative principles should multicultural states be guided by in responding to minority claims for the accommodation of cultural and religious social practices? This article explores how theories of non-domination can contribute to debates on this question in the multiculturalism literature. It examines Philip Pettit's, Cecile Laborde's and Frank Lovett's republican theories and argues that non-domination-based approaches to multicultural accommodation are more suitable to assess the dynamic of intra- and inter-group relations than the prominent liberal–multiculturalist alternative. However, their advantages are not contingent on the wider theories from which they emerge, but rather related to generalizable features of the non-domination ideal. This suggests that non-domination should also be appealing to non-republicans, who can adopt it minimally as a critical principle to determine illegitimate policies.Keywords: non-dominationmulticulturalismminority accommodationrepublican theory AcknowledgementsI wish to thank Richard Vernon for his guidance and support as a postdoctoral supervisor; Margaret Moore, Trevor Tchir and Nick Hardy for helpful comments and conversations about the argument of this paper; as well as the referees for their thoughtful suggestions and constructive criticisms.Notes1. In addition to the works discussed here, prominent accounts of the ideal of non-domination are also developed by John Maynor in his account of modern republicanism (Maynor 2003); and Clarissa Hayward, who explores non-domination from a non-republican perspective (Hayward 2000), as an ideal of political freedom drawn from a particular theory of power.2. By 'accommodations' here I mean either changes to existing policies or elements within evolving policies that address their differential effects on cultural and religious minorities. As discussed in the normative multiculturalism literature, these can include exemptions from laws and regulations (such as the exemption for Sikhs from motorcycle helmet laws, or from the ban on carrying knives in schools; or exemptions for indigenous peoples from hunting laws; or exemptions from animal slaughter regulations for kosher or halal meats; or exemption from conscription for Quakers; or exemption from schooling laws for Amish children, etc.), recognition of traditional or religious law (for example, family law arbitration, or the recognition of religious polygamous marriages, or the inclusion of oral histories as evidence in indigenous land claims); or formal measures to enable participation on par with the majority (such as multilingual services, or special representation, or provisions to recognize various religious holidays); or various measures related to a group's ability to regulate membership (such as rules of exclusion, or schooling provisions such as those associated with language laws in Quebec).3. Although in this paper I have room to consider only Will Kymlicka's renowned approach to these issues, it is important to note that liberal engagement with the topic is extensive and diverse. For example, significantly different perspectives on accommodation questions are developed by Brian Barry (Barry Citation2001) and Chandran Kukathas (Kukathas Citation2003).
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,006 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,004 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».