FRA_F_07 Disintegration through Morality? Moral Reasoning and the Charge of Moralism in Public Debates

Objectives/ Research Questions

In many contemporary political debates, the charge of moralism has become an issue of central importance. This applies, for example, to discussions about climate change, social justice, gender issues, or the topic of migration, which has dominated public discourses in Europe in recent years. Wherever fundamental questions of the self-image, the membership criteria, and the distributive rules of modern societies are negotiated, moral arguments are rejected as being “moralistic” on the grounds that they are out of place in political debates and have a disintegrative effect on society. What exactly the critics understand by moralism, which conditions moral speech has to fulfil in order to be considered moralistic, and which negative consequences moralism entails are usually only hinted at. This research project aims to address two questions in this context. First, it seeks to develop a conceptual proposal to distinguish different types of the moralism accusation. Three types of usage, which differ both in terms of their descriptive characteristics and their normative evaluation, will be elaborated: (1) moralism as a term of political rhetoric, which rejects most moral constraints in political questions as too demanding; (2) moralism as an instrumental, inauthentic use of moral arguments for non-moral purposes; and (3) moralism as a category mistake, which reduces complex political contexts to the terms of an interactionist morality. Based on this typology, the second step will be to ask how these types of moralism and moralism-criticism are to be evaluated and what these evaluations respectively mean for the use of moral arguments, moralism, and moralism-criticism in public debates. The project thus connects fundamental conceptual questions of practical ethics with questions of application that are relevant for all participants in public debates – whether it is in argument among citizens, on social media platforms, or in institutionalized political arenas.

By focusing on questions of political moralism, the project also connects to two current debates in political theory and philosophy to which it aims to contribute. These are the moral philosophical debate about the concept and normative evaluation of moralism. Important contributions here include the work by Driver (2005), Fullinwider (2005), and Tosi /Warmke (2016). An overview of the German debate, which has been ongoing since the 1960s, is provided by the anthology Neuhäuser/Seidel (2020). Parallel to the moral philosophy literature, there exists a debate on moralism vs. realism in political theory (Williams 2005; Jubb 2015; Rossi 2012) that critically questions the role of moral principles for political action. However, the two debates take little notice of each other, even though they could provide important impetus for each other. The project aims to overcome this shortcoming by bringing together the protagonists of both debates in a workshop.

Thematic Reference to Social Cohesion

The close connection to the theme of "social cohesion" is evident from the project title itself. In recent years, moral argumentation has increasingly been viewed as disruptive, that is, a form of political discourse that could endanger social cohesion. This perception is evident in publications like "Die Moralfalle. Für eine Befreiung linker Politik" (Stegemann 2019) or "Hypermoral. Die neue Lust an der Empörung" (Grau 2017). The prevailing argument in this genre suggests that engaging primarily in moral arguments on political issues departs from the realm of rational debate, where politics based on consensus is made possible, ultimately leading to societal division and polarization of political processes. Consequently, the project addresses the key question of the Research Center for Social Cohesion (FGZ) regarding threats and endangerments to cohesion, focusing on the affective and cognitive conditions of social cohesion, as well as the contextual factors of political culture. Simultaneously, the project also delves into fundamental conceptual questions concerning the significance of moral convictions for social cohesion.

The connection between morality and the endangerment of cohesion requires further examination. For instance, shared moral values and principles were considered essential bonds by the communitarians of the 1980s and 1990s, capable of countering centrifugal tendencies of individualized liberalism. Thus, the project seeks to explore the ambivalent role of moral principles and arguments for social cohesion. Additionally, it aims to address the question of whether the purpose of preserving or fostering cohesion justifies distancing oneself from moral arguments.

Literature

Driver, Julia 2005: Moralism, in Journal of Applied Philosophy 22:2, 137-151.

Fullinwider, Robert K. 2005: On Moralism, in: Journal of Applied Philosophy 22:2, 105-120.

Grau, Alexander 2017: Hypermoral. Die neue Lust an der Empörung, München.

Jubb, Robert 2015: Playing Kant at the Court of King Arthur, in: Political Studies 63:4, 919-934.

Neuhäuser, Christian; Seidl, Christian (Hrsg.)(i. E.): Moralismus, Berlin.

Rossi, Enzo 2012: Justice, Legitimacy and (Normative) Authority for Political Realists, in: Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 15:2, 149-164.

Stegemann, Bernd 2019: Die Moralfalle. Für eine Befreiung linker Politik, Berlin.

Tosi, Justin; Warmke, Brandon 2016: Moral Grandstanding, in: Philosophy & Public Affairs 44:3, 197-217.

Williams, Bernard 2005: In the Beginning was the Deed. Realism and Moralism in Political Argument, Princeton.