Accéder directement au contenu Accéder directement à la navigation
Article dans une revue

Democratic Epistemology and Democratic Morality: The Appeal and Challenges of Peircean Pragmatism

Abstract : Does the wide distribution of political power in democracies, relative to other modes of government, result in better decisions? Specifically, do we have any reason to believe that they are better qualitatively – more reasoned, better supported by the available evidence, more deserving of support – than those which have been made by other means? In order to answer this question we examine the recent effort by Talisse and Misak to show that democracy is epistemically justified. Highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of their arguments, we conclude that the differences between an epistemic conception of democracy and an epistemic justification of democracy are fundamental to determining the relative attractions of different arguments for democracy, and their implications for actual forms of government.
Liste complète des métadonnées

https://hal-sciencespo.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02506462
Contributeur : Spire Sciences Po Institutional Repository <>
Soumis le : jeudi 12 mars 2020 - 13:19:16
Dernière modification le : vendredi 2 juillet 2021 - 13:59:53

Identifiants

Collections

Citation

Annabelle Lever, Clayton Chin. Democratic Epistemology and Democratic Morality: The Appeal and Challenges of Peircean Pragmatism. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 2017, pp.432 - 453. ⟨hal-02506462⟩

Partager

Métriques

Consultations de la notice

25