There is a real issue here. There *is* always some "comprehensive worldview" or "thick" values deployed in defining the boundaries of pluralism. But that doesn't mean liberal pluralism is incoherent. 1/n https://twitter.com/MattBruenig/status/1285955280816177154

There's also good faith involved in securing a society where Catholics, Protestants, & Muslims and socialists & libertarians can all forebear together in peace. Someone like Hoppe doesn't even try, no matter what he says. We're not obliged to check our brains at the door. 2/n

There's value in the *tension* generated in the collision of pluralism and thick values. And many (most?) liberal pluralists freely admit (extol?) this. @jtlevy's Rationalism, Pluralism, and Freedom is a good place to get started thinking about this tension. 3/4

Gerald Gaus's Tyranny of the Ideal is another superb place to start on this issue. Read it and become smarter. My review at the link, but see this snippet. 4/4 https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/1624101461?book_show_action=false&from_review_page=1

But really this whole collection of tweets is just a great excuse to link to like a dozen different @LiberalCurrents pieces.