The Case for Democratic Patients: Epistemic Democracy Goes Green

In mainstream democratic theory, non-agents are only considered indirectly: their interests matter if and only if a group of agents cares about them. In this paper, I argue that democratic patients, non-agents whose interests are affected by democratic decisions, have a place of their own in democra...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Andrés Cruz
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina 2018-12-01
Series:Ethic@: an International Journal for Moral Philosophy
Subjects:
Online Access:https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/ethic/article/view/57918
id doaj-6e0be54478374bcfba6523e7445379c5
record_format Article
spelling doaj-6e0be54478374bcfba6523e7445379c52021-02-02T09:21:12ZengUniversidade Federal de Santa CatarinaEthic@: an International Journal for Moral Philosophy1677-29542018-12-0117342344410.5007/1677-2954.2018v17n3p42332522The Case for Democratic Patients: Epistemic Democracy Goes GreenAndrés Cruz0Pontificia Universidad Católica de ChileIn mainstream democratic theory, non-agents are only considered indirectly: their interests matter if and only if a group of agents cares about them. In this paper, I argue that democratic patients, non-agents whose interests are affected by democratic decisions, have a place of their own in democratic theory. That is, they are entitled to the fair consideration of their interests in the democratic decision-making process. I defend the case for democratic patients by building upon the idea of epistemic democracy as proposed by David Estlund. If democratic procedures ought to be epistemically designed towards achieving right decisions, as Estlund argues, they should consider all relevant evidence fairly, like a jury does. Since democratic patients’ interests are affected by democratic decisions, I argue that they do count as relevant evidence via the All-Affected Principle, which lies at the core of democracy. Then I present some candidates for being democratic patients, which include young children, severely cognitively disabled humans, non-existent future humans, sentient animals and even non-sentient life forms. Whether they turn out to be democratic patients depends on what theories one accepts about agency, interests, and the impact of the outcomes of democracy on interests. I illustrate that point by discussing future humans as possible candidates. Finally, I briefly explore the challenge of designing real-world institutions derived from my argument, outlining what objectives they should aim for and some of the problems they might face.https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/ethic/article/view/57918epistemic democracynon-agentsenvironmental politicsall-affected principle
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Andrés Cruz
spellingShingle Andrés Cruz
The Case for Democratic Patients: Epistemic Democracy Goes Green
Ethic@: an International Journal for Moral Philosophy
epistemic democracy
non-agents
environmental politics
all-affected principle
author_facet Andrés Cruz
author_sort Andrés Cruz
title The Case for Democratic Patients: Epistemic Democracy Goes Green
title_short The Case for Democratic Patients: Epistemic Democracy Goes Green
title_full The Case for Democratic Patients: Epistemic Democracy Goes Green
title_fullStr The Case for Democratic Patients: Epistemic Democracy Goes Green
title_full_unstemmed The Case for Democratic Patients: Epistemic Democracy Goes Green
title_sort case for democratic patients: epistemic democracy goes green
publisher Universidade Federal de Santa Catarina
series Ethic@: an International Journal for Moral Philosophy
issn 1677-2954
publishDate 2018-12-01
description In mainstream democratic theory, non-agents are only considered indirectly: their interests matter if and only if a group of agents cares about them. In this paper, I argue that democratic patients, non-agents whose interests are affected by democratic decisions, have a place of their own in democratic theory. That is, they are entitled to the fair consideration of their interests in the democratic decision-making process. I defend the case for democratic patients by building upon the idea of epistemic democracy as proposed by David Estlund. If democratic procedures ought to be epistemically designed towards achieving right decisions, as Estlund argues, they should consider all relevant evidence fairly, like a jury does. Since democratic patients’ interests are affected by democratic decisions, I argue that they do count as relevant evidence via the All-Affected Principle, which lies at the core of democracy. Then I present some candidates for being democratic patients, which include young children, severely cognitively disabled humans, non-existent future humans, sentient animals and even non-sentient life forms. Whether they turn out to be democratic patients depends on what theories one accepts about agency, interests, and the impact of the outcomes of democracy on interests. I illustrate that point by discussing future humans as possible candidates. Finally, I briefly explore the challenge of designing real-world institutions derived from my argument, outlining what objectives they should aim for and some of the problems they might face.
topic epistemic democracy
non-agents
environmental politics
all-affected principle
url https://periodicos.ufsc.br/index.php/ethic/article/view/57918
work_keys_str_mv AT andrescruz thecasefordemocraticpatientsepistemicdemocracygoesgreen
AT andrescruz casefordemocraticpatientsepistemicdemocracygoesgreen
_version_ 1724295294578851840