Internal Disagreements

Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson’s Democracy and Disagreement is a major contribution to liberal egalitarian democratic theory. Unlike many works in democratic theory, the book does not speak to institutions or voting schemes. It goes to the moral spirit of interpersonal relations among citizens and their representatives. The core idea of the book is allegedly “simple”: “When citizens or their representatives disagree morally, they should continue to reason together to reach mutually acceptable decisions” (1). But just as the “one very simple principle” of Mill’s On Liberty turns out to be more than one principle, none of which are very simple, the authors’ core idea is rich and complex. And like Mill’s harm principle, their core idea gives rise to questions and difficulties for those, like myself, who are genuinely sympathetic with the project. In what follows, I want to discuss four issues that are internal to their theory. First, I want to ask what it means to seek “mutually acceptable decisions.” Second, I suggest that they do not do as much to accommodate those with whom they disagree as their theory suggests that they should. Third, I suggest that the authors’ account of the principles that should constrain the deliberative process may provide less space for genuine disagreement and democratic choice than a robust theory of democracy should permit. Fourth, I shall examine how their theory might approach the way in which citizens and representatives should view the results of a voting process.

Deliberation · Democracy · Epistemology · Harm · Law and economics · Mill · Political science · Politics · Simple (philosophy) · Sociology · Voting · Engineering · Law · Philosophical Ethics and Theory · Philosophy · Political Philosophy and Ethics · Political Theory and Influence

• Reasonable Disagreement

  Open Access•Christopher Mcmahon•Reasonable Disagreement•2009

  Add to list

• Policy Without Learning

  Open Access•Grant Jordan•Public Policy and Administration•2007

  Add to list