Chandran Kukathas — 2023 Markets and Society Conference Keynote
TL;DR
Chandran Kukathas argues that an open society is fundamentally a regime of toleration that cannot be morally limited, as any attempt to restrict toleration by appealing to truth, justice, or reason begs the question; instead, departing from toleration is always an exercise of power, not moral justification.
🕊️ The Nature of Toleration 2 insights
Toleration as forbearance from power
True toleration means refraining from exercising power to compel others to conform to your views, applying only to behaviors you disapprove of and have the capacity to suppress.
Bayle's rejection of truth claims
Following Pierre Bayle, Kukathas asserts that claims to possess objective truth cannot justify compelling others, as dissenters claim truth with equal conviction, making such justification circular.
⚖️ The Limits of Toleration 3 insights
No moral limits possible
Attempts to limit toleration by appealing to justice fail because they presuppose the contested question of which conception of justice is correct, thus begging the question.
Critique of reasonable rejection
Kukathas challenges Rainer Forst's view that rules must be justifiable by reasons no one could reasonably reject, arguing this standard still begs the question against those who fundamentally reject such reasons.
The Spanish conquistador analogy
Just as Spanish conquistadors read justifications to trees because natives could not understand, offering supposedly unrejectable reasons to dissenters who reject them is futile and resolves nothing.
⚡ Power and the Open Society 2 insights
Power as the ultimate foundation
When regimes depart from toleration, they exercise power rather than enforce morality, acknowledging that power—not justice—is what ultimately establishes social order.
Open society as regime of regimes
An open society is an order of regimes that departs from pure toleration in the name of justice while remaining fundamentally grounded in power relationships both internally and externally.
Bottom Line
An open society must recognize that its boundaries are maintained through power rather than moral certainty, and true liberalism requires acknowledging that we cannot reasonably justify forcing conformity upon those who dissent.
More from Conversations with Tyler (Tyler Cowen)
View all
The Hayekian Triangle: The Wealth of Nations at 250
On the 250th anniversary of "The Wealth of Nations," economists Peter Boettke and Chris Coyne argue that Adam Smith remains essential reading because his institutional framework for understanding prosperity contains evolutionary potential absent from modern textbooks, even as both libertarian defenders and progressive critics frequently misrepresent his nuanced views on markets and social constraints.
Pratap Bhanu Mehta on Liberalism, Nihilism, and the Collapse of Sincerity
Pratap Bhanu Mehta argues that liberalism faces an existential crisis not from policy failures alone, but from a pervasive nihilism characterized by the willingness to 'burn the house down' without a reconstruction plan, alongside the erosion of moral authority and the triumph of nationalism as an ideology capable of licensing any violence.
Liya Palagashvili on the Startup Mindset: How to Build a Career in Economics
Economist Liya Palagashvili advocates treating early academic careers like startups—embracing risk, failing fast, and following curiosity across scholarly and public roles—rather than following traditional linear paths threatened by demographic and technological disruption.
Henry Farrell on AI as a Social Technology
Political economist Henry Farrell argues that AI systems like large language models function as 'social technologies'—complex institutional mechanisms for processing collective cultural information akin to markets and bureaucracies—rather than as individual agentic intelligences, warning that misunderstanding this distinction creates risks of ideational bubbles when AI narratives collide with reality.