Ethical expertise: The good agent and the good citizen

Zeitschrift Für Ethik Und Moralphilosophie 3 (2):337-344 (2020)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

I consider whether political deference by a citizen within a liberal democracy to moral experts is morally problematic. I compare and contrast deference in the political and personal domains. I set to one side consequentialist worries about political deference and evaluate its possible intrinsic wrongness, expressed as a worry that deference is inconsistent with the grant to individuals of the power exercised in a democratic vote, just as personal deference is inconsistent with the grant of a power of moral choice. I consider several possible versions of such inconsistency: that a vote to delegate decision-making to experts is self-defeating, that it is unfree, or is blind to the significance of exercising a political choice, or is a denial of democratic equality. I conclude that the worries are ill-founded and that political deference is not in itself morally troubling.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,098

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Analytics

Added to PP
2020-12-01

Downloads
21 (#762,792)

6 months
4 (#862,833)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

David Archard
Lancaster University

Citations of this work

Deference and delegation: What is the difference?Gopal Sreenivasan - 2020 - Zeitschrift Für Ethik Und Moralphilosophie 3 (2):345-352.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Political Liberalism.J. Rawls - 1995 - Tijdschrift Voor Filosofie 57 (3):596-598.
What is Wrong With Moral Testimony?Robert Hopkins - 2007 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 74 (3):611-634.

View all 12 references / Add more references