Contemporary Political Theory 18 (4):541-561 (2019)

Authors
Anders Molander
Høgskolen i Oslo
Abstract
Epistemic democrats are rightly concerned with the quality of outcomes and judge democratic procedures in terms of their ability to ‘track the truth’. However, their impetus to assess ‘rule by experts’ and ‘rule by the people’ as mutually exclusive has led to a meagre treatment of the role of expert knowledge in democracy. Expertise is often presented as a threat to democracy but is also crucial for enlightened political processes. Contemporary political philosophy has so far paid little attention to our reliance on experts and has not sufficiently addressed the question of how expertise can be used to improve the epistemic quality of democratic decision making. We believe this lack of interest is spurred by a too hasty acceptance of arguments dismissive of the political role of experts. The article examines a series of often-cited epistemic objections and concludes that several of them are overstated or misconceived, yet they all reflect real difficulties that need to be addressed. On this background, we tentatively outline a set of mechanisms that can contribute to alleviating the irreducible problem of epistemic asymmetries and ensuring that experts really are experts and use their expertise in the right way.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1057/s41296-018-00299-4
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 65,657
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Thinking, Fast and Slow.Daniel Kahneman - 2011 - New York: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.
Science, Policy, and the Value-Free Ideal.Heather Douglas - 2009 - University of Pittsburgh Press.
Against Democracy: New Preface.Jason Brennan - 2016 - Princeton University Press.

View all 50 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

An Epistemic Case for Confucian Democracy.Elena Ziliotti - 2020 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy:1-23.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Epistemic Circumstances of Democracy.Fabienne Peter - 2016 - In Miranda Fricker Michael Brady (ed.), The Epistemic Life of Groups. pp. 133 - 149.
What is an Expert?Bruce D. Weinstein - 1993 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 14 (1).
Moral Expertise and Democratic Legitimacy.Frank Dietrich - 2012 - Analyse & Kritik 34 (2):275-284.
Why Moral Expertise Needs Moral Theory.Michael Cholbi - 2018 - In Jamie Carlin Watson & Laura K. Guidry-Grimes (eds.), Moral Expertise: New Essays from Theoretical and Clinical Bioethics. Springer International Publishing. pp. 71-86.
On What It Takes to Be an Expert.Michel Croce - 2019 - Philosophical Quarterly 69 (274):1-21.
Lay Expertise: Why Involve the Public in Biobank Governance?Bjørn Myskja - 2007 - Genomics, Society and Policy 3 (1):1-16.
Epistemological Expertise and the Problem of Epistemic Assessment.James Mcbain - 2007 - Philosophy in the Contemporary World 14 (1):125-133.
Epistemological Expertise and the Problem of Epistemic Assessment.James Mcbain - 2007 - Philosophy in the Contemporary World 14 (1):125-133.
Epistemic Environmentalism.Shane Ryan - 2018 - Journal of Philosophical Research 43:97-112.
The Possibility of Ethical Expertise.Bruce D. Weinstein - 1994 - Theoretical Medicine and Bioethics 15 (1):1-187.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2019-01-01

Total views
80 ( #138,243 of 2,462,339 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
9 ( #78,547 of 2,462,339 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes