IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/amposc/v64y2020i1p82-101.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Well‐Ordered Society under Crisis: A Formal Analysis of Public Reason vs. Convergence Discourse

Author

Listed:
  • Hun Chung

Abstract

A well‐ordered society faces a crisis whenever a sufficient number of noncompliers enter into the political system. This has the potential to destabilize liberal democratic political order. This article provides a formal analysis of two competing solutions to the problem of political stability offered in the public reason liberalism literature—namely, using public reason or using convergence discourse to restore liberal democratic political order in the well‐ordered society. The formal analyses offered in this article show that using public reason fails completely, and using convergent discourse, although doing better, has its own critical limitations that have not been previously recognized properly.

Suggested Citation

  • Hun Chung, 2020. "The Well‐Ordered Society under Crisis: A Formal Analysis of Public Reason vs. Convergence Discourse," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 64(1), pages 82-101, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:64:y:2020:i:1:p:82-101
    DOI: 10.1111/ajps.12445
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/ajps.12445
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/ajps.12445?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cyril Hédoin, 2024. "Public reason, democracy, and the ideal two-tier social choice model of politics," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 35(3), pages 388-410, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:amposc:v:64:y:2020:i:1:p:82-101. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1540-5907 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.