Is moral deference reasonably acceptable?

References

• Anderson, Elizabeth. 2008. “An Epistemic Defense of Democracy: David Estlund’s Democratic Authority.” Episteme 5: 129–139.10.3366/E1742360008000270
   Google Scholar
• Benhabib, Seyla. 1996. “Toward a Deliberative Model of Legitimacy.” In Democracy and Difference. Contesting the Boundaries of the Political, edited by Seyla Benhabib, 67–95. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Black, Duncan. 1948. “On the Rationale of Group Decision-making.” Journal of Political Economy 56 (1): 23–34.10.1086/256633
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bohman, James. 1998. “Survey Article: The Coming of Age of Deliberative Democracy.” Journal of Political Philosophy 6 (4): 400–425.10.1111/1467-9760.00061
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Budge, Ian. 2006. “Identifying Dimensions and Locating Parties: Methodological and Conceptual Problems.” In Handbook of Party Politics, edited by Richard S. Katz and William Crotty, 422–435. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Bohman, James, and Henry Richardson. 2009. “Liberalism, Deliberative Democracy, and ‘Reasons that All Can Accept’.” Journal of Political Philosophy 17 (3): 253–274.10.1111/jopp.2009.17.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen, David. 2007. “Epistemology of Disagreement: The Good News.” Philosophical Review 116 (2): 187–217.10.1215/00318108-2006-035
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen, David. 2009. “Disagreement as Evidence: The Epistemology of Controversy.” Philosophy Compass 4 (1): 1–12.
   Google Scholar
• Christensen, David. 2010. “Higher-order Evidence.” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 81: 185–215.10.1111/phpr.2010.81.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Christensen, David, and Jennifer Lackey, eds. 2013. The Epistemology of Disagreement: New Essays. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cohen, Joshua. 1989. “Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy.” In The Good Polity: Normative Analysis of the State, edited by Alan Hamlin and Philip Pettit, 17–34. Oxford: Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Ebeling, Martin. 2016. “Epistemic Political Egalitarianism, Political Parties, and Conciliatory Democracy.” Political Theory 44: 629–656.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ebeling, Martin. 2017. Conciliatory Democracy: From Deliberation Toward a New Politics of Disagreement. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Ebeling, Martin, and Wolkenstein Fabio. forthcoming. “Exercising Deliberative Agency in Deliberative Systems.” Political Studies.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elga, Adam. 2007. “Reflection and Disagreement.” Noûs 41: 478–502.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Enoch, David. 2014. “A Defense of Moral Deference.” Journal of Philosophy 111 (5): 229–258.10.5840/jphil2014111520
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Estlund, David. 1997. “Beyond Fairness and Deliberation: The Epistemic Dimension of Democratic Authority.” In Deliberative Democracy. Essays on Reason and Politics, edited by James Bohman and William Rehg, 173–205. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Estlund, David. 1998. “The Insularity of the Reasonable: Why Political Liberalism Must Admit the Truth.” Ethics 108: 252–275.10.1086/233804
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Estlund, David. 2008. Democratic Authority: A Philosophical Framework. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Feldman, Richard. 2005. “Respecting the Evidence.” Philosophical Perspectives 19: 95–119.10.1111/phpe.2005.19.issue-1
   Google Scholar
• Feldman, Richard. 2006. “Epistemological Puzzles about Disagreement.” In Epistemology Futures, edited by Stephen Hetherington, 216–236. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Feldman, Richard. 2009. “Evidentialism, Higher-order Evidence, and Disagreement.” Episteme 6 (3): 294–312.10.3366/E1742360009000720
   Google Scholar
• Feldman, Richard, and Ted A. Warfield, eds. 2010. Disagreement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gallagher, Michael, Michael Laver, and Peter Mair. 2005. Representative Government in Modern Europe. New York: Open University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gutman, Amy, and Dennis Thompson. 1996. Democracy and Disagreement. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Habermas, Jürgen. 1990. “Discourse Ethics: Notes on a Program of Justification.” In Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action, translated by Lenhardt Christian and Shierry Weber Nicholsen, 43–115. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Habermas, Jürgen. 1996. Between Facts and Norms, Translated by William Rehg. Cambridge: MIT Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hart, H. L. A. 1982. “Commands and Authoritative Legal Reasons.” In Essays on Bentham, edited by H. L. A. Hart, 243–268. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ingham, Sean. 2012. “Disagreement and Epistemic Arguments for Democracy.” Politics, Philosophy & Economics 12 (2): 136–155.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kelly, Thomas. 2005. “The Epistemic Significance of Disagreement.” In Oxford Studies in Epistemology Vol. 1, edited by John Hawthorne and Tamar S. Gendler, 167–196. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Page numbers in the text refer to the paper available on author’s website.
   Google Scholar
• Kelly, Thomas. 2010. “Peer Disagreement and Higher Order Evidence.” In Disagreement, edited by Richard Feldman and Ted A. Warfield, 111–174. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199226078.001.0001
   Google Scholar
• McDonald, Michael D., and Ian Budge. 2005. Elections, Parties, Democracy: Conferring the Median Mandate. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/0199286728.001.0001
   Google Scholar
• Pollock, John L., and Joseph Cruz. 1986. Contemporary Theories of Knowledge. Oxford: Rowman & Littlefield.
   Google Scholar
• Rawls, John. 1996. Political Liberalism. 2nd ed. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Raz, Joseph. 1986. The Morality of Freedom. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
   Google Scholar
• Rehg, William, and James Bohman. 1996. “Discourse and Democracy: The Formal and Informal Bases of Legitimacy in Habermas’ Faktizität und Geltung.” Journal of Political Philosophy 4 (1): 79–99.10.1111/jopp.1996.4.issue-1
   Google Scholar
• Schofield, Norman. 2007. “The Mean Voter Theorem: Necessary and Sufficient Conditions for Convergent Equilibrium.” Review of Economic Studies 74: 965–980.10.1111/roes.2007.74.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shepsle, Kenneth A., and Mark S. Bonchek. 1997. Analyzing Politics: Rationality, Behavior and Institutions. New York: Norton & Co.
   Google Scholar
• Sosa, Ernest. 2010. “The Epistemology of Disagreement.” In Social Epistemology, edited by Adrian Haddock, Alan Millar, and Duncan Pritchard, 278–297. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199577477.001.0001
   Google Scholar
• Waldron, Jeremy. 1999. Law and Disagreement. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ward, Hugh, and Albert Weale. 2010. “Is Rule by Majorities Special?” Political Studies 58: 26–46.10.1111/j.1467-9248.2009.00778.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ware, Alan. 1996. Political Parties and Party Systems. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Wollheim, Richard. 1962. “A Paradox in the Theory of Democracy.” In Philosophy, Politics and Society ( Second Series), edited by Peter Laslett and W. G. Runciman, 71–87. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
   Google Scholar