Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Considering one of Georg Simmel’s questions, the article examines what gives an authority to an outnumbering superiority in a situation of a collective decision. Actually there are three conditions in that matter. First, the majority obligation for a collection of individuals’ decisions is possible only if this body is a deliberative body that is to say a collective entity but not a mere collection of individuals. Second, the stake of the decision must not challenge the members’ liking for this collective entity. Finally, to have a legitimate majority, the aggregation of preferences must be reached after a deliberation, thus stressing there might have been other preferences. If the preferences are the same or do not result from the deliberative body’s deliberation, the collective decision looks like a shared decision, a fair one is wished. The rule of the majority is not relevant any longer.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Philippe Urfalino (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: