The First Chapter discusses the possibility of constructing a notion of linguistic and moral partial commensurability while admitting, contra Davidson, the relevance of conceptual schemes. This has guided me into the investigation of schemes and commensurability in an innovative way. I have made use of the most recent results coming from cognitive linguistics and the debate upon cognitive linguistic relativism in order to overcome the idea of radical relativism.
The second chapter is a transitionary chapter and it aims at critically discussing three contemporary normative models in political philosophy. If the first part criticises the relativism of Harman, the second reject the notion of a 'view from nowhere' as developed by Nagel. It follows a criticism of Rawls' notion of primary goods and a suggestion of how some of his difficulties can be overcome through a notion of 'fundamental human rights'. This will then be developed along the third chapter.
The third chapter, develops a model of purposive agency by integrating the procedural Habermasian theory of discursive action with a revised approach to Gewirth's theory. A specific consideration is then devoted to the theoretical status of human rights judgements. In particular, there is a reference to Kant's Third Critique and a translation, into the political philosophical domain of the Kantian properties for aesthetic judgments. Several elements are derived for the understanding of the theoretical status of human rights judgments, so that from a combination of a priori principles and a posteriori synthetic judgments there obtain a rehabilitation of the notion of contingency within moral judgements. The third paragraph provides an ideal classification of the relation between law and morality. It analyses the central tenets of Aristotle, Hart, Fuller, Finnis etc. introducing my position of 'positivist inclusivism' which will be fully developed in the fourth paragraph.
Fromthe reinterpretation of the strict interlink between liberty and participatory rights, it is developed a new understanding of the functional role and of the normative validity of deliberative democracy. This paves the ground for proposing an institutional model of democracy by keeping into account the impact that different types of elections have on political representation. It follows an extension of the model of self-interested solidarity to the post-national integration of Europe though a commitment to human rights.
Can human rights principles admit degrees of contextual variations? Are our cultures condemned to a formally rigid standard of universalist hegemony? This work provides an innovative contribution to the legal-philosophical understanding of human rights theory. While advancing a post-metaphysical reconstruction for the notion of human rights, it defends an original perspective on the relation between universal validity and cultural pluralism. By rejecting the challenges of relativism and classical abstract universalism, this model reinterprets discursive theory in the light of dialectical recognition and judgmental exemplarity. The result is an enriched substantive notion of universalism oriented to the safeguard of situated authenticity. Pluralistic universalism considers that, while formal filtering criteria constitute unavoidable requirements for the production of potentially valid arguments, the exemplarity of judgmental activity, in its turn, provides a pluralistic and retrospective reinterpretation for the fixity of such criteria. While speech formal standards grounds the thinnest possible presuppositions we can make as humans, the discursive exemplarity of judgments defends a notion of validity which is both contextually dependent and "subjectively universal". According to this approach, human rights principles are embedded within our linguistic argumentative practice. It is precisely from the intersubjective and dialogical relation among speakers that we come to reflect upon those same conditions of validity of our arguments. Once translated into national and regional constitutional norms, the discursive validity of exemplar judgments postulates the philosophical necessity for an ideal of legal-constitutional pluralism, challenging all those attempts trying to frustrate both horizontal (state to state) and vertical (supra-national-state-social) on-going debates on human rights.
From the reviews:
"Claudio Corradetti's book is a thoughtful attempt to find an adequate theoretical foundation for human rights. Its approach is interdisciplinary in nature, drawing on issues in analytical philosophy as well as contemporary political theorists, and the result is a densely argued text aimed at scholars ? ." (Andrew Lambert, Metapsychology Online Reviews, Vol. 14 (3), January, 2010)
