Kozinski's analysis, though exhaustive and rigorous, still remains accessible and engaging, even for a reader unversed in the works of Rawls, Maritain, and MacIntyre. Interdisciplinary and multi-thematic in nature, it will appeal to anyone interested in the intersection of religion, politics, and culture.
|Product dimensions:||5.80(w) x 8.90(h) x 1.00(d)|
About the Author
Table of ContentsPart 1 Foreword
Part 2 Preface
Part 3 Introduction
Part 4 Part 1 - John Rawls's Overlapping Consensus
Chapter 5 Chapter 1 - Rawls's Postmodern Turn
Chapter 6 Chapter 2 - The Failure of the Overlapping Consensus
Part 7 Part 2 - Jacque Maritain's Democratic Charter
Chapter 8 Chapter 3 - Overlapping Consensus in a New Christendom
Chapter 9 Chapter 4 - Maritain's Democratic Faith: A Sign of Contradiction
Part 10 Part 3 - Alasdair MacIntyre's Confessional Consensus
Chapter 11 Chapter 5 - MacIntyre's Tradition Constituted Rationality
Chapter 12 Chapter 6 - A Critique of MacIntyre: Why Philosophy Isn't Enough
What People are Saying About This
In this rigorously argued book, Thaddeus Kozinski suggests that critiques of liberalism must find their resolution in the idea of a confessional state. Those of us who disagree will be forced to offer equally rigorous defenses of a Christian politics that is neither liberal nor state-centered. Any contemporary vision of a theological politics must take this book's stimulating and provocative argument into account.
Thaddeus Kozinski belongs to a new generation of Catholic scholars for whom the social consensus of the 1950s is something known only from oral history and old movies, and the Catholic social theory formulated within that context is woefully inadequate to meet the challenges of the twenty-first century. This work brings the theories of John Rawls, Jacques Maritain and Alasdair MacIntyre into dialog and reaches the conclusion that there are problems within the realm of political theory that cannot be solved philosophically—solutions need to be found elsewhere. Kozinski's book is on the cutting edge of a new generation of Catholic political theory and will be valuable for students of political theory everywhere regardless of their theological backgrounds.
A sophisticated, cumulative case for the moral limitations and metaphysical bankruptcy of liberal political philosophy—even in its Catholic (Maritainian) form. Drawing on the much-discussed MacIntyre but going beyond him, the author shows why civil society, and the State, need a sacral keystone to complete the arch of a comprehensive human good. My only disappointment is that the book ended so soon, before displaying what a humane theopolitically legitimated State might look like: I await with eagerness a sequel where the author will do justice to his constructive as well as analytic gifts.