O’Donovan continues his article by asking in what sense pluralism’s public reason is public. Public and private necessitate one another, and “the private is defined negatively, by privation . . . by walling off, excluding, refusing entry. Private thought, domestic privacy, property, private association, and so on are those withheld from universal access.”
Public negates this negation, or so it seems. But public areas also exclude: A public school is open to all students, but not to everyone at all. When applied to “reason,” the word “public” is even more exclusionary, it is “constructed by privation, like another kind of private sphere” in that it doesn’t admit “moral identifies formed behind its back, in private.” The public of public reason is not the town square but “more like a walled and barbed-wired garrison, bristling with warnings against entry by unauthorized personnel. It is a public conceived as another kind of privacy.”
Public so conceived creates problems as we try to move from “private” to “public.”
We know that the disciplines of the one order are not the same as the disciplines of the other, but the two must cohere. There must be a way of “linking the performance of any individual in public and the same individual’s performance in private.” If the two are separated, then public disciplines are no longer disciplines but simple prohibitions. Public reason thus “must bypass the moral reasoning of those who participate in it,” and this can only leave public actors “devoid of reasons that could lead us to act.” As a result the “second-order” reasons of public reason “are, in fact, not reasons at all, because they do not derive from, or connect with, first-order reasons.”
For Christians, what public reason excludes is charity: “Charity is a hegemonic principle; that is to say, it generates not only private but public forms of conduct, shaping a homologous identity that can move between the private and the public. If hegemonic traditions are to be expelled from society, charity, a tradition born of the Christian gospel.”
So: “Public reason” is public in the sense that it is a very tightly defined private space.
Dear Reader,
Can I be direct with you?
War abroad. Socialists on the rise. AI upending human life. Endless uproar online. The modern attention economy doesn’t want readers — it wants users enslaved to the tyranny of the present.
First Things is the antidote: literary excellence, timeless truths, and a fixed point of reference in a culture that has lost its bearings.
But we can’t do it without readers like you.
Our goal: Raise $150,000 by November 1 to sustain First Things in the year ahead.
Your gift anchors readers in the permanent things.
Make your Fall Campaign gift now using the button below.
If you have any questions or would like more information, please contact Giovanni Del Piero, Director of the Editor’s Circle, at gdelpiero@firstthings.com or 212-627-1985.
YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
The Church in the Age of Therapy
In 1966, Philip Rieff wrote in The Triumph of the Therapeutic that “Religious man was born to…
Canada’s Deadliest Blind Spot
On September 20, the Daily Mail ran a story with the provocative headline, “Our 83-year-old Christian grandmother…
The Faithful Joy of Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen
Dolly Parton and Fulton Sheen seem to have had little in common. She favored rhinestones; he wore…
