justifying democracy - epistocracy

Question 1

conclusion opinions?

Answer 1

epistocracy cannot be justified as giving a minority intrinsically more rights will result in a disproportionate amount of policies being past in favour of one group out of the population. Whether it is one person in charge, a small group or just giving more votes to certain people, those with significantly more power cannot be trusted, even with the additional criteria of ‘moral competance’ to vote in the interests of everyone. This is because it is arguably in our moral nature to protect ourselves and those closest. Further, even if this is denied, ‘moral competance’ cannot be measured in theory or in practice with no universal concept of morality. Compared to democracy, which has intrinsic and instrumental value, epistocracy is further unsatisfactory.

Question 2

why is epistocracy considered?

Answer 2

problems of democracy

• we are arguably coerced into voting through excessive, deceitful, populist driven propaganda - e.g. 300 million for the NHS.
• we don’t seem to vote for our actual interests because of this with some of the poorest places in the UK voting for Tories who systematically undercut services they need.

Question 3

Aristotle and plato on philosophy kings?

pro of this?

Answer 3

plato - philosophy kings! We should have one king in charge who posesses moral and epistemic competence, has studied/ trained for years in contemplation - the highest good, so can make the best decisions for everyone. He has consolts but makes the final decisions.
Aristotle - larger group of philosophers in charge who all possess practical wisdom
pro - small group in charge= less bureaucracy and more efficiency

Question 4

criticism of aristotle and plato ?

Answer 4

How can one man or a small group be trusted to act in the best interests of the country?
- unrepresentative of all the classes etc..

Question 5

but what if we widen the rulers to the elite?

reply -

Answer 5

Brennan - nobody incompetant in a field should hold power over others in that fielde.g. ship captain, surgeon
2- some citizens are incompetant in the field of voting and hold power over people - with their votes
C- Brennan first argues these people should refrain from voting - then argues their votes should be taken away.

This reminds me of a Soviet Russian gerontocracy. Majority are left powerless to an all powerful self serving rule of the elite.
A clear example of what rule of the elite can lead to- horrendous consequences (mass death) without giving everyone a vote in democracy.

Question 6

Argument for Millian Scholarocracy ?

Answer 6

better than elitist electorate as everyone gets a vote but intellectuals in their field get more.
1 - more education on politics -> better political decisions
2- those who are qualified in politics would make better decisions than those without moral/epistemic political knowledge
C- In order to get better political decisions, those qualified should get more votes

Question 7

David Estlund reply to Millian Scholaracy

Answer 7

A well educated population would rule more wisely than  one without. But it does not follow that giving more voting rights to a small proportion of the highly educated would make better political decisions. 
This is because the educated subset would be demographically distinctive - in terms of race, class etc... so policies benefitting certain demographics would be implemented creating unfairness.

Question 8

Reply to Estlund ?

Potential response FT?

Answer 8

what if in theory, we could arrange a demograpahically equal subset that would have more votes and carry the benefits of epistocracy

-FT - a new hierarchical class would form when you give people inherantly more rights than others who would vote in their favour in some respect or another.

Question 9

Potential further reply to FT replies?

further response? (2)

Answer 9

what if this class was epistemically and morally competant? - like possessing the practical wisdom Aristotle describes?

1 - arguably in line with morality to vote in favour of those closest to you - your new formed extra vote demographic
2- Moraro - forming a competance test seems extremely hard but a goodwill test is simply unfeasable.
FT - this is because there is no universally agreed morality!

Question 10

why is democracy prefereable to epistocracy? maybe in reply to Brennan

Answer 10

Anderson - democracy has both intrinsic and instrumental value
instrumental - does what it sets out to do , like a shopping trip, but also has intrinsic value as it is something we enjoy and value the independence of partaking in.
Even if we were in a dictatorship, or in a form of epistocracy where the educated elite made the decisions we would have made - as the government of singapore claims, we would still want to govern ourselves - there is something intrinsically valuable about participation.
support - countless demands for suffrage!