Institut for Statskundskab

Why the all affected principle is groundless

Publikation: Bidrag til tidsskrift/Konferencebidrag i tidsskrift /Bidrag til avisTidsskriftartikelForskningpeer review



The all-affected principle is a widely accepted solution to the problem of constituting the demos. Despite its popularity, a basic question in relation to the principle has not received much attention: why does the fact that an individual is affected by a certain decision ground a right to inclusion in democratic decision-making about that matter? An answer to this question must include a reason that explains why an affected individual should be included because she is affected. We identify three such reasons in the literature - to wit, interest protection, self-government and welfare - and show why they all fail. We then propose two alternative reasons, equal relations and fairness, and show why they are also deficient. Surprisingly, the all-affected principle then appears groundless, which supports withholding belief in the all-affected principle or(/and) investing future research in identifying the thus-far unidentified reason why being affected grounds a claim to inclusion.

TidsskriftJournal of Moral Philosophy
Sider (fra-til)571-596
Antal sider26
StatusUdgivet - dec. 2021

Se relationer på Aarhus Universitet Citationsformater


Ingen data tilgængelig

ID: 222832957