Amartya Sen’s Identity Pluralism Applied to Will Kymlicka’s Liberal Multiculturalism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Multicultural theory pays surprisingly little attention to the plurality of identity. In addition, there is still dissatisfaction with Will Kymlicka’s distinction between polyethnic groups and national minorities and the rights they deserve, as well as continued criticism of liberal multiculturalism more broadly. I revisit this distinction based on Amartya Sen’s recent effort to introduce the notion of identity pluralism into liberal debates. In Identity and Violence: The Illusion of Destiny (W.W. Norton and Company, New York, 2006), Sen stresses the importance of maintaining political stability through individuals’ plural identities mainly in relation to religious divides and global conflict. Sen’s theory is criticised for being too abstract, but I interpret these abstract ideas to criticise Kymlicka’s distinction between polyethnic groups and national minorities and strengthen liberal multiculturalism. I argue that the notion of identity pluralism implies that a state must promote multicultural ‘participation rights’ for all minority identities, rather than ‘accommodation rights’ for polyethnic groups and ‘self-government rights’ for national minorities as Kymlicka contends. Consequently, regions like Quebec, Flanders and Catalonia would not merit the level of autonomy they currently enjoy, and Scotland should not be granted independence from the United Kingdom.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".