Abstract

In this dissertation, I investigate the utility of John Rawls's theory of political liberalism in societies where religion wields a significant social and political influence. In his theory, Rawls puts up a defense of democracy and democratic values, reconciling religious and secular demands through a just and stable public order. In this respect, political liberalism emerges as a significant theoretical and normative resource in dealing with the challenges faced by liberal democracy in view of religious resurgence in the world. Notwithstanding its inclusive outlook, the theory of political liberalism also bears a set of structural limitations which undermines its appeal in a wider context. The ideals of liberal democracy presented in political liberalism require presence of a political culture of reasonable pluralism. The inclusive vision of political liberalism can only be put into practice when political reasonableness prevails over the political calculations of the citizenry. Accordingly, I introduce two major theoretical attempts from the liberal tradition that can help generate political reasonableness in societies where religion wields significant influence. I present Locke's view of political toleration of religion and Smith's view of state impartiality and argue that it is possible to read both views into contemporary situations. If construed in a way that addresses both the religious and secular citizenry, both views might be rather constructive for institutionalization of political reasonableness in contemporary societies.