The paradox of persisting opposition

Politics, Philosophy and Economics 1 (1):109-146 (2002)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

If voters accord evidentiary value to one another's reports, revising their own views in the light of them as Bayesian rationality requires, then even relatively small electoral majorities ought to prove rationally compelling and opposition ought rationally to vanish. For democratic theory, that is a jarring result. While there are no resources for avoiding that result within the Bayesian model itself, there are various aspects of the political process lying outside that model which do serve to underwrite the rationality of persistent opposition to majority opinion. Key Words: Bayesian rationality • consensus • political opposition

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,202

External links

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

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
36 (#419,193)

6 months
6 (#417,196)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Robert Goodin
Australian National University

Citations of this work

On the significance of the absolute Margin.Christian List - 2004 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 55 (3):521-544.
Are disagreements honest.Tyler Cowen & Robin Hanson - forthcoming - Journal of Economic Methodology.
Special majorities rationalized.Robert E. Goodin & Christian List - 2006 - British Journal of Political Science 36 (2):213-241.
The (severe) limits of deliberative democracy as the basis for political choice.Gerald F. Gaus - 2008 - Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory 55 (117):26-53.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Do Motives Matter?Robert E. Goodin - 1989 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 19 (3):405 - 419.
Do Motives Matter?Robert E. Goodin - 1989 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 19 (3):405-419.

Add more references