Public justification and democratic adjudication

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

7 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Contractualists seek to publicly justify moral principles, but it seems doubtful that a set of specific principles or policies can be definitively justified. In this sense, the contractualist project has an indeterminate result: the precise content of liberal morality is open to reasonable dispute. Liberal citizens thus find themselves disagreeing about the demands of liberal morality. They require, as Locke argued, an umpire to resolve their disputes. This paper analyzes what is required of such an umpire, and then employs a four-stage argument to show that constitutional representative democracy is the uniquely justified umpiring procedure for resolving these disputes. Democratic politics, on this view, is the continuation of ethical dispute by other means.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)251-281
Number of pages31
JournalConstitutional Political Economy
Volume2
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Sep 1991
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

morality
representative democracy
citizen
politics
Adjudication
Dispute
Public Justification
Justification
Morality

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Social Sciences(all)
  • Economics, Econometrics and Finance(all)

Cite this

Public justification and democratic adjudication. / Gaus, Gerald F.

In: Constitutional Political Economy, Vol. 2, No. 3, 09.1991, p. 251-281.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{2630ead1a0df479fbe48ea42eb7234fb,
title = "Public justification and democratic adjudication",
abstract = "Contractualists seek to publicly justify moral principles, but it seems doubtful that a set of specific principles or policies can be definitively justified. In this sense, the contractualist project has an indeterminate result: the precise content of liberal morality is open to reasonable dispute. Liberal citizens thus find themselves disagreeing about the demands of liberal morality. They require, as Locke argued, an umpire to resolve their disputes. This paper analyzes what is required of such an umpire, and then employs a four-stage argument to show that constitutional representative democracy is the uniquely justified umpiring procedure for resolving these disputes. Democratic politics, on this view, is the continuation of ethical dispute by other means.",
author = "Gaus, {Gerald F}",
year = "1991",
month = "9",
doi = "10.1007/BF02393132",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "2",
pages = "251--281",
journal = "Constitutional Political Economy",
issn = "1043-4062",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Public justification and democratic adjudication

AU - Gaus, Gerald F

PY - 1991/9

Y1 - 1991/9

N2 - Contractualists seek to publicly justify moral principles, but it seems doubtful that a set of specific principles or policies can be definitively justified. In this sense, the contractualist project has an indeterminate result: the precise content of liberal morality is open to reasonable dispute. Liberal citizens thus find themselves disagreeing about the demands of liberal morality. They require, as Locke argued, an umpire to resolve their disputes. This paper analyzes what is required of such an umpire, and then employs a four-stage argument to show that constitutional representative democracy is the uniquely justified umpiring procedure for resolving these disputes. Democratic politics, on this view, is the continuation of ethical dispute by other means.

AB - Contractualists seek to publicly justify moral principles, but it seems doubtful that a set of specific principles or policies can be definitively justified. In this sense, the contractualist project has an indeterminate result: the precise content of liberal morality is open to reasonable dispute. Liberal citizens thus find themselves disagreeing about the demands of liberal morality. They require, as Locke argued, an umpire to resolve their disputes. This paper analyzes what is required of such an umpire, and then employs a four-stage argument to show that constitutional representative democracy is the uniquely justified umpiring procedure for resolving these disputes. Democratic politics, on this view, is the continuation of ethical dispute by other means.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=34249923100&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=34249923100&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/BF02393132

DO - 10.1007/BF02393132

M3 - Article

VL - 2

SP - 251

EP - 281

JO - Constitutional Political Economy

JF - Constitutional Political Economy

SN - 1043-4062

IS - 3

ER -