Titlebook: Epistemic Democracy and Political Legitimacy; Ivan Cerovac Book 2020 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive lice

Fixate

書目名稱Epistemic Democracy and Political Legitimacy影響因子(影響力)




書目名稱Epistemic Democracy and Political Legitimacy影響因子(影響力)學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Epistemic Democracy and Political Legitimacy網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度




書目名稱Epistemic Democracy and Political Legitimacy網(wǎng)絡(luò)公開度學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Epistemic Democracy and Political Legitimacy被引頻次




書目名稱Epistemic Democracy and Political Legitimacy被引頻次學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Epistemic Democracy and Political Legitimacy年度引用




書目名稱Epistemic Democracy and Political Legitimacy年度引用學(xué)科排名




書目名稱Epistemic Democracy and Political Legitimacy讀者反饋




書目名稱Epistemic Democracy and Political Legitimacy讀者反饋學(xué)科排名

極大痛苦

https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-91174-3. This position endorses the truth tenet but, building upon epistemology of peer disagreement, claims that democratic procedures have some intrinsic epistemic qualities. I present arguments against the introduction of the concept of epistemic peerhood in the debate on political legitimacy and end th

canonical

微枝末節(jié)

慷慨援助

The Knowledge Tenet,. This position endorses the truth tenet but, building upon epistemology of peer disagreement, claims that democratic procedures have some intrinsic epistemic qualities. I present arguments against the introduction of the concept of epistemic peerhood in the debate on political legitimacy and end th

Neonatal

Neonatal

Epistemic Democracy,legitimacy, such as Estlund’s standard account of epistemic democracy, which I endorse and defend in this book. The chapter proceeds by analyzing how various forms of democratic decision-making meet the criteria set by Estlund and concludes that aggregative democracy should be rejected in favor of deliberative democracy.

Arable

左右連貫

Book 2020 decisions. Mapping and critically engaging with the main theories of epistemic democracy, it additionally evaluates arguments for different democratic decision-making procedures related to aggregative and deliberative democracy...Addressing both positions that are too epistemic, such as Epistrocrac

固執(zhí)點(diǎn)好

System der Fett- und Wachsanalyse,stocracy, I demonstrate that scholocracy can be rejected as well, since it is not unreasonable to think that some epistemically damaging features (biases) might be present in the group that is given greater political authority. I end the chapter by claiming that the authority tenet should be rejected.