Reply to Copp, Gaus, Richardson, and Edmundson

Ethics 121 (2):354-389 (2011)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

This piece is a response to four essays that critically discuss my book Democratic Authority. In addition to responding to their specific criticisms, it takes up several methodological issues that put some of the critiques in a broader context. Among the issues discussed are “normative consent,” which I offer as a new theory of authority; the “general acceptability requirement,” which advances a broadly Rawlsian approach to political justification; and methodological questions about theory building, including a device I dub the “method of provisional leap.”

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,571

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Should We Be Utopophobes About Democracy in Particular?Patrick Tomlin - 2012 - Political Studies Review 10 (1):36-47.
Consent and Its Cousins.William A. Edmundson - 2011 - Ethics 121 (2):335-53.
Whose Power? Which Rationality?Michael Byron - 2001 - In Thomas R. Hensley (ed.), The Boundaries of Freedom of Expression and Order in American Democracy. Kent State University Press. pp. 68-71.
Jeremy Waldron on law and disagreement.David Estlund - 2000 - Philosophical Studies 99 (1):111-128.
Debate: Estlund on democratic authority.Thomas Christiano - 2009 - Journal of Political Philosophy 17 (2):228-240.

Analytics

Added to PP
2014-03-04

Downloads
6 (#1,454,046)

6 months
2 (#1,192,610)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

David Estlund
Brown University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations