. In 2005, we argued that pragmatism and pluralism are inconsistent. The argument proceeds from pragmatic elucidations of both pragmatism and pluralism. First, we argued that although pragmatism comes in different flavors, it is always a combination of the commitments to conceptual clarification and

: distinct groups of immigrants, in many cases illegal immigrants, with different norms and moral values, some of which are antagonistic as well as incompatible, regularly interact with members of these societies. In the face of these conditions one should ask if liberal pluralism can respond adequately to

legitimacy should seek to accommodate and respond to the existence of pluralism within contemporary liberal states. 2 Yet the kind of pluralism that has loomed large in these discussions is pretty tame. It is often restricted to those individuals and points of view that are reasonable and excludes

of this paper is to develop and defend a conception of moral coherence that is appropriately compatible with the possibility of principle pluralism. In coherence methods of moral reasoning, such as the method of reflective equilibrium, we reason by examining how well our particular moral beliefs fit

issues that Hick’s writings arouse, namely the matter of religious pluralism. Utilizing the Hickian epistemological discourse on human inability to know the divine in itself, we will claim that Kaplan’s realistic religion supports a similar epistemological notion that allows for a plurality of religious

liberal politics would be unthinkable without Christian theology’. 23 Such claims can, it should be added, be advanced without in any way appealing for Christian public privilege and so can be endorsed by advocates of the variant of pluralism I now want to outline. Principled Pluralism The

religion reveals that in fact all these ideas have lived together or alongside each other, for many decades predating the current era. The jurisprudence also shows that the Court somehow accommodated (and justified) these different ideas through a focus on democratic pluralism (not religious pluralism), a

since the late 20th Century and even more after the fall of Suharto in 1998. 2 Anxiety towards religious pluralism has increasingly plagued the country, even more so after 2005 when the Majelis Ulama Indonesia (Indonesian Council of Muslim scholars, MUI ) released a fatwā 3 opposing pluralism

Hegemony is never simply power imposed from above: it is always the result of “negotiations” between dominant and subordinate groups, a process marked by both “resistance” and “incorporation”. 1 Cultural diversity or pluralism automatically imposes the structural necessity for domination by