Proceduralism justifies rules, decisions, or institutions by reference to a valid process, as opposed to their being morally correct according to a substantive account of justice or goodness. Procedures such as the rule of law, democratic voting, or the voluntary consent of states are argued to confer justice or legitimacy upon their results, even if the latter are flawed. In democratic theory, procedural accounts locate the legitimacy of state laws in a deliberative process with rights of political participation. Laws, including those which are unjust in principle, are made valid by the democratic process. In the international arena proceduralists argue that international law and policies are justified by approval through an accepted legal process, ultimately based on the consent of states. On this view, states or rules which violate principles of justice, such as human rights, still can attain legitimacy.
The procedures themselves can have either a moral or instrumental...
References
Bohman J, Rehg W (1997) Deliberative democracy: essays on reason and politics. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Google Scholar
Clark I (2005) Legitimacy in international society. Oxford University Press, Oxford
Google Scholar
Enoch D (2009) On Estlund’s democratic authority. Iyyun The Jerusalem Philos Quart 58:35–48
Google Scholar
Estlund D (2008) Democratic authority: a philosophical framework. Princeton University Press, Princeton
Google Scholar
Franck T (1990) The power of legitimacy among nations. Oxford University Press, New York
Google Scholar
Peter F (2008) Pure epistemic proceduralism. Episteme 5:33–55
CrossRef
Google Scholar
Download references
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Department of History and Philosophy, Austin Peay State University, Clarksville, TN, USA
Jordy Rocheleau
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Department of Philosophy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT, USA
Deen K. Chatterjee
Copyright information
© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.