Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-04T18:24:16.256Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Resolution of Wollheim's Paradox

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 April 2010

Sven Ove Hansson
Sven Ove Hansson
Affiliation:
Uppsala University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Richard Wollheim (1962) provided an acute formulation of the problematic situation of an outvoted democrat. We are invited to consider an individual who endorses the democratic procedure, or ‘democratic machine’. Furthermore, this person prefers policy A, and has voted for it. “He chooses A or prefers A to B, because he thinks that A is the best policy, is the policy that ought to be enacted, or, alternatively, that A is a better policy than B or ought to be enacted in preference to B” (pp. 77–78). Now, how does this person react when it turns out that the democratic decision was in favour of B? “How can the citizen accept the machine's choice, which involves his thinking that B ought to be enacted when, as we already know, he is of the opinion, of the declared opinion, that A ought to be enacted?” (p. 78).

Type
Articles
Information
Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review / Revue canadienne de philosophie , Volume 32 , Issue 4 , Fall 1993 , pp. 681 - 688
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 1993

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Barry, Brian 1965 Political Argument. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Goldstick, D. 1975 “Correspondence.” Philosophy and Public Affairs, 4: 195–97.Google Scholar
Hansson, Sven Ove 1989 “A New Semantical Approach to the Logic of Preference.” Erkenntnis, 31: 1–42.Google Scholar
Hansson, Sven Ove 1990 “Preference-Based Deontic Logic (PDL).” Journal of Philosophical Logic, 19: 75–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Honderich, Ted 1974 “A Difficulty with Democracy.” Philosophy and Public Affairs, 3: 221–26.Google Scholar
Pennock, J. Roland 1974 “Democracy is not Paradoxical.” Political Theory, 2: 88–93.Google Scholar
Schick, Frederic 1969 “Arrow's Proof and the Logic of Preference.” Philosophy of Science, 36: 127–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schiller, Marvin 1969 “On the Logic of Being a Democrat.” Philosophy, 44: 46–56.Google Scholar
Walzer, Michael 1981 “Philosophy and Democracy.” Political Theory, 9: 379–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weale, Albert 1983 Political Theory and Social Policy. London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weiss, Donald D. 1973 “Wollheim's Paradox.” Political Theory, 1: 154–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wollheim, Richard 1962 “A Paradox in the Theory of Democracy.” In Peter Laslett and W. G. Runciman, Philosophy, Politics and Society. Second Series. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 71–87.Google Scholar
von Wright, Georg Henrik 1963 The Logic of Preference. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar