Titlebar

Export bibliographic data
Literature by the same author
plus on the publication server
plus at Google Scholar

 

Is the All-Subjected Principle Extensionally Adequate?

Title data

Andrić, Vuko:
Is the All-Subjected Principle Extensionally Adequate?
In: Res Publica. (6 October 2020) .
ISSN 1572-8692
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11158-020-09479-9

Official URL: Volltext

Abstract in another language

This paper critiques the All-Subjected Principle. The All-Subjected Principle is one of the most prominent answers to the Boundary Problem, which consists in determining who should be entitled to participate in which democratic decision. The All-Subjected Principle comes in many versions, but the general idea is that all people who are subjected in a relevant sense with regard to a democratic decision should be entitled to participate in that decision. One respect in which versions of the All-Subjected Principle differ concerns how to best understand ‘subjectedness’. One view spells out ‘subjectedness’ in terms of legal bindingness. Another view understands ‘subjectedness’ in terms of coercion. I argue that the All-Subjected Principle is extensionally inadequate on both views in that it yields verdicts that are at odds with our considered judgements about certain cases. These cases involve legal norms of referral or international administrative assistance.

Further data

Item Type: Article in a journal
Refereed: Yes
Keywords: All-Subjected Principle; Boundary Problem; Legal bindingness; Coercion; Legal norms of referral; International administrative assistance
Institutions of the University: Faculties > Faculty of Cultural Studies > Department of Philosophy > Chair Philosophy II
Faculties
Faculties > Faculty of Cultural Studies
Faculties > Faculty of Cultural Studies > Department of Philosophy
Result of work at the UBT: Yes
DDC Subjects: 100 Philosophy and psychology > 100 Philosophy
Date Deposited: 27 Mar 2021 22:00
Last Modified: 29 Mar 2021 07:28
URI: https://eref.uni-bayreuth.de/id/eprint/64451