The All Affected Principle, and the weighting of votes

IF 1.6 2区哲学 Q2 ETHICS Politics Philosophy & Economics Pub Date : 2020-08-18 DOI:10.1177/1470594X20949938

Kim Angell, R. Huseby

引用次数: 3

Abstract

In this article we defend the view that, on the All Affected Principle of voting rights, the weight of a person’s vote on a decision should be determined by and only by the degree to which that decision affects her interests, independently of her voting weights on other decisions. Further, we consider two recent alternative proposals for how the All Affected Principle should weight votes, and give reasons for rejecting both.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

所有受影响原则，以及投票的权重

在本文中，我们捍卫的观点是，根据投票权的所有受影响原则，一个人对一项决定的投票权重应取决于且仅取决于该决定对其利益的影响程度，而独立于她对其他决定的投票权重。此外，我们考虑了最近关于“所有受影响原则”应如何加权投票的两项备选建议，并给出拒绝这两项建议的理由。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

Politics Philosophy & Economics Multiple-

CiteScore

1.60

自引率

0.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Politics, Philosophy & Economics aims to bring moral, economic and political theory to bear on the analysis, justification and criticism of political and economic institutions and public policies. The Editors are committed to publishing peer-reviewed papers of high quality using various methodologies from a wide variety of normative perspectives. They seek to provide a distinctive forum for discussions and debates among political scientists, philosophers, and economists on such matters as constitutional design, property rights, distributive justice, the welfare state, egalitarianism, the morals of the market, democratic socialism, population ethics, and the evolution of norms.

期刊最新文献

A Farewell Editorial Democratic speech in divided times: An introduction How to talk back: hate speech, misinformation, and the limits of salience Discursive optimism defended Lockdowns and the ethics of intergenerational compensation