Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that A solution to a coordination problem, once established, may become entrenched even if a different rule would be more 'reasonable.'
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
2 perspectives
Reason for 1 of 2
?
1.
Rawlsian reflective equilibrium demands that entrenched rules be continuously tested against principles of fairness, not merely stability.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
A rule that persists due to path dependency rather than rational endorsement lacks the normative legitimacy required to bind participants.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reason for 2 of 2
?
1.
Habermas argues that legitimacy requires ongoing communicative rationality, meaning no coordination norm is exempt from discursive challenge.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Entrenchment that silences deliberation transforms a provisional social arrangement into an illegitimate constraint on rational autonomy.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
The benefits of everyone conforming to the same rule outweigh the costs of changing to a different rule.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42