The Place of Judgment in the Conversation: A Reply to Michael W. Clune

Abstract

Abstract: I find much to admire in Michael W. Clune’s book A Defense of Judgment . I have some points of disagreement as well. I think the argument concedes too much to the bad idea that political egalitarianism implies a lack of difference among judgments of value. I have reservations about the idea of “expertise” (let alone deference to experts) in philosophy or literary studies. And I believe that Clune’s use of an essay of mine does not accurately portray its content or purpose. Nonetheless I think the book is a powerful and insightful intervention.