Monthly Archives: April 2008

I’m grateful to Zofia for the excellent summary and questions. Let me say something about her question in order: On her (1): Zofia asks whether there is really much point to hopeless ideal theory if we really know it won’t … Continue reading →

Summary Much research demonstrates that voters are largely ignorant about the issues and institutions at stake when they vote. Some research also suggests that voters are selfish and irrational. Such poor voter performance might be thought to pose problems for … Continue reading →

Thanks again to Jonathan for the very useful summary and comments. I’ll consider his three questions in order. First, Jonathan raises a small exegetical question. Does Rawls suggest the kind of democracy/contractualism analogy of the kind I’m discussing? Nothing in … Continue reading →

Summary In this chapter, David wants to distinguish his epistemic argument for democracy from what he calls the democracy/contractualism analogy (I’m going to refer to this simply as the analogy or the analogy argument). The analogy rests on two key … Continue reading →

Thanks to Loren for the great summary and questions. Loren is largely sympathetic, so, as a reward, this can be more brief than most weeks. But he does raise two concerns. First, Loren proposes a way of avoiding the disjunction … Continue reading →

If your account of democratic authority uses the term “epistemic” then sooner or later you’re going to have to deal with the Jury Theorem. And here is where David takes up the gauntlet. I’ve made that seem rather dramatic, but … Continue reading →

Blain’s summary is accurate and helpful, and he raises several good questions. I take those up before turning to questions by the other participants. Blain’s first worry is whether, in the absence of an account that would give us clear … Continue reading →