Today I present the main arguments of my thesis to the Moral Philosophy Seminar - 4:30 in the Philosophy Faculty. Here's an abstract:
This paper challenges the common assumption that democracy requires majority rule. I assume that we can adopt a contractualist approach to uncover the demands of political equality and argue that contractors would not necessarily accept majority rule to make decisions in their society. I first reject broadly consequentialist arguments, arguing that firstly no procedure guarantees ideally best outcomes, secondly that in cases of pluralism there is no need to suppose there is a uniquely best outcome, and thirdly that we need to be fair between different individuals. I develop this need for fairness into a case for weighted lotteries, drawing on the Taurek-Scanlon 'saving the greater number' debate. This leads to my conclusion that democratic ideals can be realized by selecting a random vote to determine the outcomes of decisions.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
In about two weeks’ time, voters in the UK will be given an historic opportunity to change the electoral system. The referendum motion asks ...
-
As the dust settles after June’s referendum, it’s notable that the leaders of the Leave campaign ( Johnson , Gove , Farage , Leadsom ) ...
-
J. S. Mill argues that individuals should be able to engage in 'experiments in living' free from social pressures (provided that the...
No comments:
Post a Comment