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 The political authority of a democratic assembly is entailed by an account of the conditions under which citizens may legitimately exercise coercive power over one another.

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

    Reasons For

    2 perspectives
    Reason for 1 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Majority rule can systematically exclude persistent minorities, making democratic coercion illegitimate for those who never consent and cannot exit.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Rousseau's 'general will' and Rawls's 'reasonable pluralism' both concede that procedural democracy fails to generate substantive legitimacy for all subjects.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Therefore, democratic assembly authority cannot be fully entailed by mutual-coercion licensing conditions, since those conditions require reciprocity that majority rule structurally denies.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reason for 2 of 2
    ?
    • 1.Legitimate coercive authority requires that subjects have genuine access to the normative reasons justifying that authority, not merely procedural participation.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Estlund's epistemic proceduralism and Christiano's work both show that democratic outcomes can be systematically wrong in ways that sever the epistemic link between procedure and justification.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.An account of mutual coercion licensing grounded in epistemic adequacy therefore does not automatically entail democratic assembly authority when democratic majorities are reliably mistaken.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.In a democracy, the right to rule is created by those who are ruled.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.There is no sharp division between 'binders' and 'bound' in a democracy.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Democratic authority therefore derives from the very conditions that license mutual coercion among citizens.
      ?

      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.