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 Pettit's own republican framework identifies non-arbitrariness, not popular authorship, as the constitutive feature of non-dominated status.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Without popular authorship, rules lack legitimacy; non-arbitrariness alone cannot justify why individuals should obey constraints.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Non-arbitrariness is compatible with systematic exclusion of groups from rule-making; it doesn't ensure equal political standing.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Republican freedom requires not just predictable rules but also having a voice in their creation and revision over time.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Non-arbitrariness constrains power through predictable rules, protecting individuals even when majorities oppose their choices.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Popular authorship alone permits tyranny of the majority; non-arbitrariness provides principled limits independent of democratic will.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Subjects can be dominated by arbitrary rulers even in democracies; non-arbitrariness better captures intuitive non-domination.
      ?

      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.