In political philosophy, the concepts of overlapping consensus and comprehensive doctrines play important roles in understanding how individuals and groups with diverse beliefs can coexist in society. While overlapping consensus emphasizes cooperation and compromise, comprehensive doctrines prioritize the supremacy of a single system of belief. In this article, we’ll explore the key differences between overlapping consensus and comprehensive doctrines, and why they matter in today’s society.

1. Defining Overlapping Consensus

Overlapping consensus is a concept introduced by John Rawls, an American philosopher. According to Rawls, overlapping consensus occurs when individuals or groups with different comprehensive doctrines, or systems of belief, can agree on a common set of principles or norms. These principles or norms may be justified for different reasons, but they provide a basis for cooperation and collaboration among diverse groups.

For example, in a democracy, people may agree on the principle of free and fair elections but have different justifications for why this principle is important. Some may argue that free and fair elections promote individual freedom, while others may argue that they promote social justice. Despite these different justifications, people can still work together to promote and protect the principle of free and fair elections.

2. Defining Comprehensive Doctrines

Comprehensive doctrines, on the other hand, are complete and all-encompassing systems of belief that seek to explain the nature of reality and provide a framework for moral decision-making. Examples of comprehensive doctrines include religion, ideology, and philosophy. Comprehensive doctrines are often in conflict with each other, as they offer different and sometimes incompatible explanations of reality.

Unlike overlapping consensus, comprehensive doctrines prioritize the supremacy of a single system of belief. This means that individuals who hold different comprehensive doctrines cannot fully cooperate or collaborate with each other, as their beliefs are fundamentally incompatible.

3. Why Overlapping Consensus Matters

Overlapping consensus is important because it allows for cooperation and collaboration among diverse groups, even if they hold different beliefs and values. By identifying areas of overlapping consensus, individuals and groups can work together to achieve common goals, while still maintaining their individual beliefs and values. This promotes a more inclusive and pluralistic society, where people can live together despite their differences.

Overlapping consensus is also important because it encourages individuals to engage in dialogue and debate with each other, rather than simply asserting the supremacy of their own beliefs. By engaging in dialogue and debate, individuals can learn from each other and develop a more nuanced understanding of complex issues.

4. Why Comprehensive Doctrines Matter

Comprehensive doctrines are important because they provide individuals with a framework for understanding the world and making moral decisions. For many people, their comprehensive doctrine provides a sense of purpose and meaning in life. Comprehensive doctrines can also provide a basis for social cohesion and community-building, as individuals who share the same beliefs and values can come together to achieve common goals.

However, comprehensive doctrines can also be problematic, as they often lead to conflict and division among different groups. When individuals prioritize the supremacy of their own beliefs over the beliefs of others, it can be difficult to find common ground and work together towards a shared goal.

5. Example of Overlapping Consensus and Comprehensive Doctrines

To better understand the difference between overlapping consensus and comprehensive doctrines, let’s look at some examples:

Example 1: Climate Change

Overlapping Consensus: People may agree that climate change is a serious problem that requires action, but have different justifications for why this is the case. Some may argue that climate change threatens the survival of future generations, while others may argue that it threatens the economic stability of the world. Despite these different justifications, people can still work together to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, invest in renewable energy, and promote sustainable development.

Comprehensive Doctrines: People who hold different comprehensive doctrines may have fundamentally different beliefs about the nature of climate change and the appropriate response to it. For example, some religious groups may believe that climate change is God’s will and cannot be prevented, while some economic groups may believe that the costs of addressing climate change outweigh the benefits. These different beliefs can lead to conflict and division, making it difficult to address climate change effectively.

Example 2: Abortion

Overlapping Consensus: People may agree that access to safe and legal abortion is important, but have different justifications for why this is the case. Some may argue that women have the right to control their own bodies and make decisions about their reproductive health, while others may argue that restricting access to abortion would lead to unsafe and illegal procedures. Despite these different justifications, people can still work together to promote access to safe and legal abortion, and to reduce unintended pregnancies through education and contraception.

Comprehensive Doctrines: People who hold different comprehensive doctrines may have fundamentally different beliefs about the morality of abortion and the appropriate response to it. For example, some religious groups may believe that abortion is always morally wrong and should be illegal, while some feminist groups may believe that access to abortion is a fundamental right that should not be restricted. These different beliefs can lead to conflict and division, making it difficult to find common ground and work towards a shared goal.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, overlapping consensus and comprehensive doctrines represent two different approaches to political and moral decision-making. Overlapping consensus emphasizes cooperation and compromise among individuals and groups with diverse beliefs, while comprehensive doctrines prioritize the supremacy of a single system of belief. While both approaches have their strengths and weaknesses, it is clear that overlapping consensus offers a more inclusive and pluralistic vision of society, where individuals can work together to achieve common goals while still maintaining their individual beliefs and values. By understanding the difference between these two approaches, we can work towards a more peaceful and collaborative society that respects the diversity of human experience.