Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

shockingdevelopment t1_j4lg43j wrote

Reply to comment by contractualist in Democracy is Only a Means to an End (Examining the Inherent Political Authority of Democracy) by contractualist

I don't mean aesthetic values, I mean fundamental politics. I.e. hierarchy vs egalitarianism. The left and right can both make rational arguments for these opposing values. How do you decide if the experts should push left or right wing policy?

I would say democratically.

2

contractualist OP t1_j4lhipv wrote

Yes, I wrote in another comment that values and power distributions are the best arguments for democracy.

I’ll be arguing that democracy is useful for establishing these overarching values where the moral principles of the social contract are ordered in terms of priority. These are the values of a society which may be expressed through voting. Although this is different than policy making, which turns those national political values into concrete legal rules. The former applies moral principles to social and cultural circumstances to create constitutional values whereas the latter applies those constitutional values to social facts to create legal rules. Yet reason is applied in both cases. Values that can’t be publicly justified aren’t values that have political authority.

2

shockingdevelopment t1_j4liy59 wrote

That just sounds like most democracies today. The public guide meta ethics and (theoretically) experts develop policy to further our community's choices.

2

contractualist OP t1_j4ln7a7 wrote

That's what I argue it should be. Yet from a US standpoint, too much discretion is currently given to democratic majorities and legislative action. At the end of the piece, I argue that courts and agencies should play a greater role in curbing the actions of majorities when they conflict with reason.

1