The reason for this is probably that the considerations of reasonable pluralism that drive theorists away from shared evaluative standards will have already been sufficient to drive them away from a shared reasons standard.
I was born during WWII, and one of the things I've believed all my life, without really thinking about it, is that we Americans had a shared understanding about the reasons we fought that war.
When we act together as citizens through the state, we act on the basis of shared reasons, a common ideal of justice.
The idea of publicity is frequently understood in terms of the publicity of shared reasons (see Rawls 2002, 173 for a connection between shared reasons and publicity).
This ignores the complexity which is introduced when we distinguish between shared reasons and shared standards.
Instead, intelligibility is an additional requirement, apart from bare logical sufficiency, that recognizes that, while A might not share reasons with others, the reasons he has should, in some sense, be available to others to consider and endorse as reasons at least for A (even if not for them).
Sharing reasons for allocating a particular ranking encouraged young service users to share their views in a safe environment with people who had similar experiences.
"This word 'why' introduces a very important practice: the practice of sharing reasons, comparing reasons, criticizing reasons, rebutting reasons, [the] give-and-take of reasoning together," Dennett said.
Public reason liberals often argue that reasons should be shared but say little about what it means to share reasons.
The thing about fairs, festivals, and conventions is that, although they are usually based around a shared interest, the real reason for going is to socialize.
If a shared history can generate such reasons, then our reasons to preserve features of human life that have existed from time immemorial should be very strong.
