Democratic LawPub Date : 2021-10-21DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780190084486.003.0006
Richard R. W. Brooks
{"title":"Common Knowledge and Cheap Talk in Democratic Discourse and Law","authors":"Richard R. W. Brooks","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190084486.003.0006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190084486.003.0006","url":null,"abstract":"This commentary illuminates key aspects of Shiffrin’s view by appeal to concrete examples and notions from game theory. It underscores the role of law as a means for the public communication of moral commitments by invoking the idea of common knowledge. Our commitments must be known to be shared, that knowledge itself must be known to be shared, and so on ad infinitum. This offers a perspective on the importance of common law from a democratic framework: common law can be seen as a mechanism for generating common knowledge about disputes and their resolution. The commentary invokes another game-theoretic notion, that of the contrast between cheap talk and costly signaling, to illuminate Shiffrin’s discussion of constitutional balancing. Where the interests of speaker and addressee are not aligned, cheap talk lacks credibility, and this is something to which courts need to be sensitive in balancing state and constitutional interests.","PeriodicalId":143544,"journal":{"name":"Democratic Law","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132648947","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Democratic LawPub Date : 2021-10-21DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780190084486.003.0008
S. Shiffrin
{"title":"Replies to Commentators","authors":"S. Shiffrin","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190084486.003.0008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190084486.003.0008","url":null,"abstract":"This chapter responds to the commentaries by Kolodny, Brooks, and Stilz by elaborating on and adding to points made in the first three chapters. In connection with Chapter 1, it addresses various aspects of the requirement to communicate respect, including the collective character of the required communication, the effectiveness and appropriateness of law as its form, the need for equal participation in crafting it, and the possibility of individual dissent from it. It also considers whether the communicative conception offers a plausible normative account of the motivations underlying democratic movements. In connection with Chapters 2 and 3, it expands on the democratic character of common law and defends the claim that states may pursue discretionary interests, arguing that this pursuit is compatible not only with specific requirements of justice but also with liberalism.","PeriodicalId":143544,"journal":{"name":"Democratic Law","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125628100","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Democratic LawPub Date : 2021-10-21DOI: 10.1093/oso/9780190084486.003.0007
A. Stilz
{"title":"Communication Through Law?","authors":"A. Stilz","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190084486.003.0007","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190084486.003.0007","url":null,"abstract":"This commentary raises four critical questions for Shiffrin’s account of democratic law. First, why does our duty to communicate recognition for others as moral equals ground a special duty to our fellow citizens to cooperate together in a democracy? Second, whose messages exactly does democratic law communicate—is it the messages of individual citizens or the messages of the state as a corporate agent? Third, why does discharging our communicative duties require us to play an equal role in our political system, especially given Shiffrin’s endorsement of the idea that common law counts as a form of democratic co-authorship? And finally, how does the state’s pursuit of discretionary interests, for example in the promotion of a national culture or the preservation of fetal life, help us to send morally valuable messages to one another?","PeriodicalId":143544,"journal":{"name":"Democratic Law","volume":"2 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-10-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129882803","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}