Explore UCD

UCD Home >

POL36170

Academic Year 2026/2027

Respecting Diversity (POL36170)

Subject:
Politics
College:
Social Sciences & Law
School:
Politics & Int Relations
Level:
3 (Degree)
Credits:
10
Module Coordinator:
Dr Alexa Zellentin
Trimester:
Spring
Mode of Delivery:
On Campus
Internship Module:
No
How will I be graded?
Letter grades

Curricular information is subject to change.

There is a widely and strongly held commitment to treat people with equal respect and concern. However, people disagree about what respect and concern requires and thus what it means to show them in equal measure. The course provides an overview of normative approaches to diversity in political theory, with particular focus on the debates in analytic philosophy. We discuss the reasoning underlying as well as important critiques of liberal impartiality, liberal multiculturalism, relevant streams of discourse theory and deliberative democracy as well as more radical critiques such as e.g. agonism.

About this Module

Learning Outcomes:

On completion of this module, you should be able to:
• read and critically engage with normative political theory scholarship on difference, diversity, recognition, agonism, and multiculturalism
• explain key concerns and debates such as freedom of speech, religious ac-commodations, equality of opportunity, language rights, public reasoning, and respect for autonomy
• distinguish between the normative, conceptual, and empirical background assumptions of claims about respect for diversity
• analyse, criticise, evaluate, and justify moral demands relating to respect for diversity
• evaluate different conceptualisations of key moral ideals relating to respect for diversity
• develop informed arguments for taking one or another particular position on controversial issues in engagement with the current literature
• collaborate with a diverse group of peers on exercises relating to the module contents

Indicative Module Content:

There is a widely and strongly held commitment to treat people with equal respect and concern. However, people disagree about what respect and concern requires and thus what it means to show them in equal measure. The course provides an overview of normative approaches to diversity in political theory, with particular focus on the debates in analytic philosophy. We discuss the reasoning underlying as well as important critiques of liberal impartiality, liberal multiculturalism, relevant streams of discourse theory and deliberative democracy as well as more radical critiques such as e.g. agonism.

The United Nations identified seventeen Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) as core to the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, and UCD contributes in general to SDG 4 Quality Education. Further SDGs explored within this module if relevant are listed below. A scale of 1 - 5 indicates the extent to which the SDG is covered.


 

Student Effort Hours:
Student Effort Type Hours
Lectures

12

Seminar (or Webinar)

12

Autonomous Student Learning

176

Total

200


Approaches to Teaching and Learning:
The best way to learn philosophy is to philosophise, that is, having a debate putting forward our strongest arguments and carefully considering the objections of our interlocutors, refining our reasoning and engaging again with critics… Part of the job is questioning our own views and double-checking our intuitions. Think Socratic method. However, before developing a normative judgement that can be well defended one needs to know at least some of the relevant theory. Your learning in this module thus involves different activities and sources.
Readings
The readings selected for this module are mostly original contributions to the normative political theory literature rather than textbooks explaining ideas and traditions. The class schedule below sets out the required readings for each session.
All required readings must be completed before the class for which they are assigned.
Handouts
There are thematic handouts on key issues and themes of the module. These summarise important definitions, distinctions, and questions on the topic in question. It might be helpful to have the handout at hand while doing the readings.
Classes
This class are meant to be conducted in seminar style. There will be no lectures summarising the readings. Instead, students are expected to come prepared and to initiate in-class discussion by bringing up their questions and concerns. Questions of understanding are particularly welcome, since the readings are contributions to debates and it cannot be expected that students understand the implications of the specific background.
There usually will be an introduction of central themes supported by slides, but students are always invited to bring up questions and ideas that might lead to another focus. Classes provide room for active learning, that is for trying out your ideas on the issue. You are expected to come prepared to discuss the ideas discussed and arguments made in the required readings.
There is an in-class exercise for each weak which counts towards the active participation grade which accounts for 10% of the overall grade.
Questions
Philosophical issues are by their nature puzzling, so please expect to be puzzled a lot during this module, probably even confused. If you do not have questions, you are doing it wrong! Please make sure to note down any questions you have on the readings, the handouts, and the lectures and to let me know about them: I will work any such queries into the plan for the next class. Please remember to note the page number for any unclear passages.
Where you want a direct and personal response, please sign up for a slot during my office hour.
Writing
Your grade in this module depends largely on a written assignment, so please practice writing as much as you can. It will be extremely helpful to make notes while reading relevant literature. Please remember to also note down your questions as well as any insights you gained during classroom discussions.
While you take notes, please remember to note down the relevant page numbers as for this module all references to particular claims in the literature (be it in form of direct quotations or simply in form of referring to an idea discussed by another author) must be accompanied by a properly formatted in-text reference that includes the relevant page number.

Requirements, Exclusions and Recommendations

Not applicable to this module.


Module Requisites and Incompatibles
Not applicable to this module.
 

Assessment Strategy
Description Timing Component Scale Must Pass Component % of Final Grade In Module Component Repeat Offered
Assignment(Including Essay): 3000 word normative political theory essay Week 14 Graded No
51
No
Participation in Learning Activities: Participation in in-class discussions and exercises. Week 1, Week 2, Week 3, Week 4, Week 5, Week 6, Week 7, Week 8, Week 9, Week 10, Week 11, Week 12 Standard conversion grade scale 40% No
10
No
Quizzes/Short Exercises: Quizzes on the required readings for the week to come. Week 1, Week 2, Week 3, Week 4, Week 5, Week 6, Week 7, Week 8, Week 9, Week 10, Week 11, Week 12 Standard conversion grade scale 40% No
24
No
Quizzes/Short Exercises: Preparatory exercises for term project. Week 3, Week 6, Week 9 Standard conversion grade scale 40% No
15
No

Carry forward of passed components
No
 

Resit In Terminal Exam
Summer No
Please see Student Jargon Buster for more information about remediation types and timing. 

Feedback Strategy/Strategies

• Feedback individually to students, post-assessment
• Group/class feedback, post-assessment
• Online automated feedback
• Peer review activities

How will my Feedback be Delivered?

Group/class Feedback, pre-assessment in terms of detailed rubric Feedback individually to students, post-assessment, with reference to rubric Group/class feedback, post-assessment In line with university policy students will be provided with feedback within 20 days of the deadline for submitting the assignment.

Anderson, Joel and Honneth, Axel (2004). Autonomy, vulnerability, recognition, and jus-tice. In: Autonomy and the Challenges to Liberalism edited by Christman, John, 127-149, Cambridge University Press. (Available online from the UCD library)
Bader, Veit (2014). Free Speech or non-discrimination as trump? Reflections on contex-tualised reasonable balancing and its limits. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 40 (2), 320–338. (UCD e-journal)
Brettschneider, Corey Lang (2015). Free speech as an inverted right and democratic per-suasion. In: Philosophical Foundations of Human Rights edited by Cruft, Rowan, Liao, S. Matthew and Renzo, Massimo, 361–378, Oxford University Press. (323.01 CRU).
De Marneffe, Peter (1990). Liberalism, liberty, and neutrality. Philosophy & Public Affairs, 19 (3), 253-274. (UCD e-journal)
Driver, Julia (2007). Ethics: the Fundamentals. Blackwell. (170 DRI)
Eyal, Nir (2005). 'Perhaps the most important primary good': Self-Respect and Rawls's principles of justice. Politics, Philosophy & Economy, 4 (2), 195-219. (UCD e-journal)
Forst, Rainer (2003). Toleration, justice and reason. In: The culture of toleration in diverse societies edited by McKinnon, Catriona and Castiglione, Dario, 71-85. (UCD e-book).
Fraser, Nancy (1999). Social justice in the age of identity politics: Redistribution, recogni-tion, and participation. In: Culture and Economy after the Cultural Turn edited by Ray, Larry J and Sayer, R Andrew, 25-52, Sage. (Available online from the UCD li-brary)
Galeotti, Anna Elisabetta (2015). The range of toleration: From toleration as recognition back to disrespectful tolerance. Philosophy & Social Criticism, 41 (2), 93-110. (UCD e-journal)
Galston, William A. (1995). Two concepts of liberalism. Ethics, 105 (3), 516-534. (UCD e-journal)
Lægaard, Sune (2009). Normative interpretations of diversity. Ethnicities, 9 (3), 314-333.
Lazenby, Hugh (2016). What is equality of opportunity in education? Theory and Re-search in Education, 14 (1), 65-76. (UCD e-journal)
Martinich, A. P. (various editions). Philosophical Writing: An Introduction. Blackwell. (808.06661 MAR slc)
McBride, Cillian (2009). Demanding recognition. European Journal of Political Theory, 8 (1), 96-108. (UCD e-journal)
Meyer, Kirsten (2016). Why should we demand equality of educational opportunity? Theory and Research in Education, 14 (3), 333-347. (UCD e-journal)
Mouffe, Chantal (2013). Agonistics. Thinking the World Politically. Verso. (320.01 MOU)
Patten, Alan and Kymlicka, Will (2003). Introduction: Language rights and political theo-ry: Context, issues, and approaches. In: Language Rights and Political Theory edit-ed by Kymlicka, Will and Patten, Alan, 1–51, Oxford University Press. (306.449 KYM)
Patten, Alan (2012). Liberal neutrality: A reinterpretation and defense. Journal of Political Philosophy, 20 (3), 249-272. (UCD e-journal)
Waldron, Jeremy (1987). Theoretical foundations of Liberalism. The Philosophical Quar-terly, 37 (147), 127-150. (UCD e-journal)
Walzer, Michael (1984). Liberalism and the art of separation. Political Theory, 12 (3), 315-330. (UCD e-journal)

Timetabling information is displayed only for guidance purposes, relates to the current Academic Year only and is subject to change.
Spring Lecture Offering 1 Week(s) - 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33 Tues 09:00 - 10:50