Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Home/Original/inverse
    See Original
    Inverse View

    It is not the case that An argument from fairness alone is insufficient to establish the superior legitimacy of democratic decision-making over other procedures

    ?Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Other decision-making procedures, such as flipping a coin, also satisfy a fairness requirement
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.If multiple procedures satisfy the same fairness requirement, fairness cannot distinguish among them
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Fairness, as Rawls construes it, concerns equal standing among participants, not merely equal probability of outcome.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A coin flip grants equal probability but denies participants the standing to offer reasons, which is constitutive of equal respect.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Procedures that deny reason-giving fail the deeper fairness requirement even if they satisfy surface-level equiprobability conditions.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Peter Singer and Robert Dahl argue democratic legitimacy requires not just procedural equality but equal consideration of interests across decisions over time.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.A single coin flip cannot institutionalize the ongoing accountability mechanisms through which equal consideration of interests is sustained.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore fairness as equal consideration of interests requires more than any single procedure can provide, exposing fairness arguments as insufficient on their own to privilege democracy.
      ?

      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.