Policy Sciences

, Volume 26, Issue 3, pp 229–247

Democracy, preferences and paternalism

  • Robert E. Goodin

Abstract

Democracy is essentially a political system that respects people's preferences, with models of democracy differing principally in how they accomplish that. Choice among those models can be facilitated by reflecting upon various public policies which are not preference-respecting. Examination of policies which are paternalistic, and justifiably so, reveals which sorts of preferences ought be to respected and which not. These findings are then used to reflect back onto our choice among models of democracy.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Anderson, Elizabeth S. (1991). ‘John Stuart Mill and experiments in living,’Ethics 102: 4–26.Google Scholar
  2. Arnould, R. J. and H. Grabowski (1981). ‘Auto safety regulation: An analysis of market failure,”Bell Journal of Economics 12: 27–48.Google Scholar
  3. Bachrach, Peter (1967).The Theory of Democratic Elitism. Boston: Little, Brown.Google Scholar
  4. Blustein, Jeffrey (1982).Parents and Children: The Ethics of the Family. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  5. Bowles, Samuel and Herbert Gintis (1986).Democracy and Capitalism. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  6. Brennan, Geoffrey and Loren Lomasky (1993).Democracy and Decision. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  7. Buchanan, Allen E. (1978). ‘Medical paternalism,’Philosophy and Public Affairs 7: 371–390.Google Scholar
  8. Burke, Edmund (1774). ‘Speech to the electorate at Briston,’ in Paul Langford, ed.,Writings and Speeches of Edmund Burke. Oxford: Clarendon Press, vol. 2, 1980, pp. 95–97.Google Scholar
  9. Care, Norman S. (1984). ‘Career choice,’Ethics 94: 283–302.Google Scholar
  10. Cohen, Joshua (1989). ‘Deliberation and democratic legitimacy,’ in Alan Hamlin and Philip Pettit, eds,The Good Polity. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 17–34.Google Scholar
  11. Dahl, Robert A. (1956).A Preface to Democratic Theory. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  12. Dryzek, John S. (1990).Discursive Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Edelman, Murray (1977).Political Language. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  14. Elster, Jon (1979).Ulysses and the Sirens. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Elster, Jon (1986). ‘The market and the forum: Three varieties of political theory,’ in Jon Elster and Aanund Hylland, eds.,Foundations of Social Choice Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 103–132.Google Scholar
  16. Elster, Jon (1988). ‘Consequences of constitutional choice: Reflections on Tocqueville,’ in Jon Elster and Rune Slagstad, eds.,Constitutionalism and Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 81–101.Google Scholar
  17. Feinberg, Joel (1986).Harm to Self (volume 3 ofThe Moral Limits of the Criminal Law). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Fiorina, Morris P. (1981).Retrospective Voting in American National Elections. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Frankfurt, Harry G. (1971). ‘Freedom of the will and the concept of a person,’Journal of Philosophy 68: 5–20.Google Scholar
  20. Kleinig, John (1983).Paternalism. Totowa, N.J.: Rowman and Allanheld.Google Scholar
  21. Gelman, Andrew and Gary King (1993). ‘Why are American presidential election campaign polls so variable when votes are so predictable?’British Journal of Political Science 23: 409–452.Google Scholar
  22. Gerber, Elisabeth R. and John E. Jackson (1993). ‘Endogenous preferences and the study of institutions,’American Political Science Review 87: 639–656.Google Scholar
  23. Gintis, Herbert (1972). ‘A radical analysis of welfare economics and individual development,’Quarterly Journal of Economics 68: 572–599.Google Scholar
  24. Goodin, Robert E. (1980).Manipulatory Politics. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Goodin, Robert E. (1982).Political Theory and Public Policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  26. Goodin, Robert E. (1986). ‘Laundering preferences,’ in Jon Elster and Aanund Hylland, eds.,Foundations of Social Choice Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 75–101.Google Scholar
  27. Goodin, Robert E. (1989).No Smoking: The Ethical Issues. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  28. Goodin, Robert E. (1990). ‘Liberalism and the best judge principle,’Political Studies 38: 181–195.Google Scholar
  29. Goodin, Robert E. (1991). ‘Permissible paternalism: In defence of the nanny state,’The Responsive Community 1: 42–51.Google Scholar
  30. Goodin, Robert E. (1992).Motivating Political Morality. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  31. Gutmann, Amy (1987).Democratic Education. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Habermas, Jürgen (1973).Legitimation Crisis, Thomas McCarthy (tr.). London: Heinemann.Google Scholar
  33. Kahneman, Daniel, Paul Slovick and Amos Tversky, eds. (1982).Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Kiewiet, D. Roderick (1983).Micropolitics and Macroeconomics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  35. Macpherson, C. B. (1977).The Life and Times of Liberal Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. May, J. D. (1978). ‘Defining democracy,’Political Studies 26: 1–14.Google Scholar
  37. Miller, David (1992). ‘Deliberative democracy and social choice,’Political Studies 40 (Special Issue): 54–67.Google Scholar
  38. O'Neill, Onora and William Ruddick, eds. (1979).Having Children: Philosophical and Legal Reflections on Parenthood. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  39. Page, Benjamin I. and Robert Y. Shapiro (1992).The Rational Public. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  40. Pennock, J. Roland (1979).Democratic Political Theory. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Peters, R. S. (1966).Ethics and Education. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  42. Pettit, Philip (1982). ‘Habermas on truth and justice,’ in G. H. R. Parkinson, ed.,Marx and Marxisms. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 207–228.Google Scholar
  43. Pitkin, Hanna F. (1967).The Concept of Representation. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
  44. Rohrschneider, Robert (1988). ‘Citizens' attitudes toward environmental issues: Selfish or self-less?’Comparative Political Studies 21: 347–367.Google Scholar
  45. Sagoff, Mark (1988).The Economy of the Earth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Schumpeter, Joseph A. (1950).Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy. New York: Harper & Row, 3rd ed.Google Scholar
  47. Sunstein, Cass R. (1993). ‘Democracy and shifting preferences,’ in David Copp, Jean Hampton and John E. Roemer, eds.,The Idea of Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 196–230.Google Scholar
  48. Wikler, Daniel (1979). ‘Paternalism and the mildly retarded,’Philosophy and Public Affairs 8: 377–392.Google Scholar
  49. Watson, Gary (1977). ‘Skepticism about weakness of will,’Philosophical Review 86: 316–339.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert E. Goodin
    • 1
  1. 1.Philosophy Program, Research School of Social SciencesAustralian National UniversityCanberraAustralia

Personalised recommendations