9 - 10 August 2022
Beyond practical reason and/or economic rationality do any other human distinctive features reflect on constitutional law? Is it possible to identify any range of moral feelings and/or emotional mind-states as normatively relevant in terms of constitutional decision-making? Do atavistic political sentiments still count? Why do similar written constitutions –with almost identical provisions- not exhibit similar levels of compliance?
Throughout history, in various geographies, it is crystal clear that certain individuals' moral and character skills have been key data for predicting social cohesion and civil cooperation. A wide range of savvy philosophers, politicians, and constitutional scholars have delved into this issue. Aristotle, Cicero, N. Machiavelli, T. Hobbes, JJ. Rousseau, D. Hume, Robespierre, T. Jefferson, J. Madison, M. Weber, H. Arendt, B. Williams, R. Hardin, M. Nussbaum, J. Habermas, T. Nagel, J. Elster, M. Sandel, A. Sajó; all of them are examples of this unstable trend.
After Solon and Clysthenes’ democratic reforms, for instance, Athenians not only relied on egalitarian deliberation (‘boulesis’) and collective reason ('logos'). From early times, they cherished what they called the 'areté' -a polysemic concept whose current meaning is close to civic virtue- as well as to the 'thumos' -a kind of spiritual commitment to the Polis collective destiny-. By the end of the XVIII Century, coupling freedom and equality, the French revolutionary apothegm also underscored ‘fraternity’ as a superior goal of the nascent republic. Finally, we have come across the idea of a constitutional patriotism as a key element of civilized legal realms.
Moral feelings conveying the pursuit of happiness, trust, loyalty, honor, decency, solidarity, and/or tolerance have been either plausible or concealed categories randomly harnessed by constitutionalism. For example, many constitutional aims and values that had been fostered by Enlightenment have survived through a certain kind of civic emotional education. Besides, constitutional design has drawn institutional incentives based upon dynamic representations of how individuals’ behavior should be.
Beyond strategic calculation and sheer rationality, moral feelings are likely to provide justifying reasons for State regulations and compelling law enforcement. In short, the conference’s goal is to analyze how and why constitutional emotional responses such as civic trust, fraternity, tolerance, altruism, constitutional patriotism, etc., etc., have thrived and become the cement of peaceful coexistence and social cooperation in some polities.
Reflecting on these categories looks particularly relevant in Latin America, where high rates of corruption and authoritarianism are randomly undermining the legacy of constitutionalism.
Call for papers
Submission of Abstracts:
The conveners encourage submissions from senior and postdoc scholars and researchers as well as from Ph.D. and LLM candidates. A maximum of 12 proposals will be sorted into two panels. After collecting the submitted proposals, a specially appointed board will proceed to select the most promising and relevant abstracts. Those who are chosen will be invited to submit a full paper and present its core content at the IACL-AIDC Córdoba Round Table. They will present their papers in two consecutive panels in the morning of August 10, 2022. Each speaker will be given a maximum of twelve minutes to present her/his paper.
There is no visa requirement for most countries. However, would-be visitors should confirm by themselves what their visa situation is.
There is no cost either for participation or for submitting a paper. Paper presenters and participants, in general, must bear the expenses of their travels, meals, and accommodation.