خوانشی جماعت گرایانه از فمینیسم لیبرال در اندیشه‌ جان استوارت میل

جماعت گرایی یکی از فلسفه‌های‌ سیاسی‌ مطرح‌ در فرهنگ‌ کنونی‌ غرب‌ است و یک‌ واکنش‌ فکری‌ در برابر لیبرالیسم ‌محسوب می شود. اگرچه اکثر جماعت گرایان در نظریه پردازی های خود تلاش می کنند با زبان خنثای جنسیتی سخن بگویند، اما می توان نتیجه گرفت که نقد آن ها از لیبرالیسم شامل فمینیسم لیبرال نیز می شود. در این مقاله، با خوانش جماعت گرایان منتخب و از طریق روش هرمنوتیکی اسکینر، دیدگاه جان استوارت میل، فیلسوف لیبرال- فایده گرای قرن نوزدهم و فمینیست پیشرو بررسی می شود تا با یافتن حلقه ای ارتباطی، چالش های حاصله از رویکرد لیبرالی در جوامع سنتی تعدیل شود. استوارت میل از لیبرال های میانه رو و تحت تاثیر مکاتب دیگر نیز بوده است. لذا، پرسش مقاله حاضر این است که میل در برداشت خود از عدالت جنسیتی، به کدامیک از مولفه های جماعت گرایان نزدیک و از کدام مولفه ها دور می شود؟ فرض این است که دیدگاه اکثر جماعت گرایان منتخب در این پژوهش، متفاوت از دیدگاه میل در خصوص مقولاتی همچون ﻓﺮدﮔﺮاﯾﯽ، بی طرفی دولت، جانب داری از سنت ها و ویژگی های فرهنگی و جهان شمولی است، اما میل به دلیل پلورالیسم اخلاقی اش استثنائاتی در این موارد قائل می شود.

a communitarian reading of liberal feminism in the thought of john stuart mill

introduction and statement of the problemcommunitarianism is based on the critique of modernity and liberalism, and the liberal feminism is no exception in this regard. therefore, by selecting four communitarians and through their readings, this study examines gender justice in the thought of john stuart mill, especially his views in the book “the subjection of women”. the purpose of this research is to find a link between communitarianism and liberalism to alleviate the challenges in traditional societies posed by liberalism.therefore, the question is; in his understanding of gender justice, mill is close to which intellectual component of the selected communitarians and which aspect of his thought differs from them? the answer is; most of the communitarians in response to liberalism take a different path from mill’s attitude regarding categories such as individualism, neutrality of the state, ignoring culture and traditions of a specific society and universalism. but, because of his moral pluralism, mill makes some exceptions. furthermore, mill and the selected communitarians have a consensus about the uniqueness of each person’s personality, which leads to “the right to difference” methodthe qualitative nature of the current research has led to use interpretative and hermeneutical methods. therefore, the quentin skinner’s pattern and his recommendations are used. skinner ignores text-based approaches and is more interested in contextual approach, but he does not consider it enough and refers to the author’s intention.findings and disscusionthe focus of this study has been on the criticism of communitarians against liberalism including; to enshrine right over good, neutrality of the state, neglecting the traditions and universality. the right of the individual plays a central role in mill’s theory of justice and the women’s rights which has been resulted from his idea of “equality in right” include equality of all people of all races, ethnicities, religions and genders. but most of the communitarians except nussbaum give priority to individualism. nussbaum has a different reading of aristotle’s teachings. so, she thinks liberal individualism is better for women.communitarians unlike liberals allow government intervention in morality in order to guide people towards happiness and prosperity. of course, mill prefers the non- intervention of the government in social life, but he makes exceptions to this policy. in fact, mill believes in governmental activities but not those activities that restrict freedom of the people.while communitarians emphasize on the role of traditions in specific societies and the need for the individual to follow the cultural specifications formed throughout history, liberals like mill see it as an obstacle in the way of personal development and prosperity of women. nussbaum agrees with mill and states; looking at the women’s lives helps us see the incompetence of traditional approaches.historically, universalism gave a powerful argument to liberals and early femininst thinkers to extend the principles of the enlightenment period to women. john stuart mill, like other liberals prefers universality, but sometimes he criticizes the universality of human nature and emphasizes on the uniqueness of each person’s personality. consequently, he believes in “the right to difference”. in this case, he agees with the communitarians but each one defines it in a different way. mill’s view on the right to be different is influenced by the romanticism of rousseau and herder, and communitarians consider aristotelian practical wisdom and virtue ethics.therefore, by adhering to the principles of liberalism, mill considers gender justice in individual freedom and equal rights for men and women in the government limited to law and non-traditional societies and so his attitude is not in line with the attitudes of the communitarians. but about the specificity of each person’s personality which leads to “the right to difference” is close to the views of the communitarians.conclusionin general, john stuart mill’s meaning of individuality is freedom and independence, not selfish individualism and generally his attitudes are not in line with the attitudes of the communitarians except nussbaum. but, the views of mill and the selected communitarians about the unique personality of each person which leads to “the right to difference” are compatible.another point is that, considering that feminism is an inductive theory and a way of seeing and making sense of things, it is expected that by becoming widespread all over the world, it will turn into a form that can not be easily dealt with by the western experiences. this issue evokes particularism and situationalism of communitarianism. with this way of thinking, feminism which began with liberalism, must adhere to the meaning and concept of justice and rights that are specific and multiple at the level of societies.