Abstract:
The fact that individuals in liberal and multicultural societies pursue their own goods as
dictated by their own values inevitably gives rise to conflicts. This paper focuses on
clashes that take place between the state and substate agents. In effect, the state
proposes social norms that sometimes conflict with the social norms that are accepted
and promoted by the individuals and their communities. The causes behind these
clashes could be either that the communities advocate for illiberal social norms and
therefore contradict the liberal framework, that the state has exceeded the powers
commonly attributed to it by liberalism or that both the state and the community
disagree on which social norms are actually supported by liberalism.
The objective of this paper is precisely to test a specific method to solve these clashes
that are now becoming more frequent and sensitive, as liberal societies become more
multicultural. More specifically, this paper advocates for a certain understanding of the
rule-and-exemption approach that reveals itself as a just method to solve these conflicts.
The rule-and-exemption approach is frequently proposed by multiculturalist
philosophers as a convenient course of action in accommodating cultural minority
groups into the mainstream society. This approach, however, allows for different
interpretations and not all have been equally successful.
The example of the rule-and-exemption approach defended in this paper is constructed
upon two elements: the elementary canons of rational thought and the subsidiarity
principle. The elementary canons are those principles which we have overwhelming
reasons to accept. They help us to classify clashes between those where a certain
advocated social norm violates the basic canons and those where no social norm
violates the canons. The subsidiarity principle, which preferentially grants authority to
the substate agent, presents an inspiring understanding on how to solve these clashes.
This paper argues that the acceptance of these two elements compels the philosopher to
accept the rule-and-exemption approach.
