康德反民主案

IF 0.9 Q3 POLITICAL SCIENCE

Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy Pub Date : 2022-10-19 DOI:10.1080/13698230.2022.2133828

Alon Harel

{"title":"康德反民主案","authors":"Alon Harel","doi":"10.1080/13698230.2022.2133828","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Contrary to what Cordelli argues, the relationship between Kantian legitimacy and democratic decision-making is contingent rather than necessary. This paper counters the connection between Kantian legitimacy and democracy in three ways: by arguing that democratic authorization is (i) not necessary, (ii) not sufficient, and indeed may be (iii) detrimental to, legitimate governance.","PeriodicalId":46451,"journal":{"name":"Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Kantian case against democracy\",\"authors\":\"Alon Harel\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13698230.2022.2133828\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT Contrary to what Cordelli argues, the relationship between Kantian legitimacy and democratic decision-making is contingent rather than necessary. This paper counters the connection between Kantian legitimacy and democracy in three ways: by arguing that democratic authorization is (i) not necessary, (ii) not sufficient, and indeed may be (iii) detrimental to, legitimate governance.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46451,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13698230.2022.2133828\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"POLITICAL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13698230.2022.2133828","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"POLITICAL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要与Cordelli的观点相反，康德合法性与民主决策之间的关系是偶然的，而不是必要的。本文从三个方面反驳了康德合法性与民主之间的联系：认为民主授权（i）不必要，（ii）不充分，甚至可能（iii）不利于合法治理。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

The Kantian case against democracy

ABSTRACT Contrary to what Cordelli argues, the relationship between Kantian legitimacy and democratic decision-making is contingent rather than necessary. This paper counters the connection between Kantian legitimacy and democracy in three ways: by arguing that democratic authorization is (i) not necessary, (ii) not sufficient, and indeed may be (iii) detrimental to, legitimate governance.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy POLITICAL SCIENCE-

CiteScore

1.60

自引率

0.00%

发文量