WELL: my quick response to
Walloworld's response to my flirtation with authoritarianism: I'm trying to cash out my tentative belief that there's something to Rousseau's
ex-post censor concept (that someone should enforce collective unanimous judgments on certain topics, the same way someone enforces collective unanimous decisions (i.e. laws)), and something deeply wrong with Mill's argument that a society can't be healthy when everyone agrees uncontroversially on the rightness of some opinion by asking what would it be like if everyone (individually or collectively) ended up having the same (normatively right) opinion. It's not clear to me that it would be problematic, and it seems like an odd restriction on people's power that they can't do certain things to enforce their unanimous opinions, even when normatively right. I'm not sure exactly where this is going, but I'll be kicking it around in my head some over the weekend, and see what I come up with.
No comments:
Post a Comment