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 Public reason accounts face the further challenge of showing that public justification is required for political legitimacy.

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

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Even if Simmons' objection against Rawlsian public reason accounts is refuted, it remains an open question whether public justification is a necessary condition for political legitimacy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Enoch (2015) raises this challenge against public reason approaches.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    2 perspectives
    Reason against 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Political authority necessarily involves coercive enforcement of norms on persons who may reasonably reject the underlying rationale.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Coercion imposed on terms that the coerced could not reasonably accept constitutes a fundamental violation of their standing as autonomous agents.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Any account of legitimacy that permits such coercion without justificatory constraint fails to respect the moral equality of persons subject to political power.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason against 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Estlund's 'Queen of the Nazis' argument shows that epistemic proceduralism requires acceptability constraints to avoid legitimating monstrous outcomes.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Acceptability constraints function only if there exists a standard of what counts as a reasonable basis for acceptance or rejection of political norms.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Public justifiability provides the only principled, non-arbitrary criterion for distinguishing legitimate from illegitimate exercises of political authority.
      ?

      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.