Abstract
Defenders of epistemic democracy propose that the “wisdom of the many” will result in superior outcomes: in this context, they hold that widespread participation will yield better constitutional norms. While this argument, featured prominently in Hélène Landemore’s recent work, raises significant normative concerns, this essay focuses on the causal mechanism it posits and the evidence adduced for the claim. Drawing on Jeremy Bentham’s critiques of common lawyers’ claims to wisdom, this essay argues it is better to defend inclusivity on the grounds that it will promote the people’s interests, rather than on the epistemic value of popular participation.
Original language | English (US) |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 323-337 |
Number of pages | 15 |
Journal | Critical Review |
Volume | 36 |
Issue number | 3 |
DOIs | |
State | Published - 2024 |
Keywords
- common law
- constitutionalism
- epistemic democracy
- Jeremy Bentham
- participatory democracy
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Political Science and International Relations
- Literature and Literary Theory