Cognitive Diversity or Cognitive Polarization? On Epistemic Democracy in a Post-Truth World

Esther K. H. Ng
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02691728.2023.2248926
IF: 1.625
2023-09-07
Social Epistemology
Abstract:Pessimism over a democracy's ability to produce good outcomes is as longstanding as democracy itself. On one hand, democratic theorists consider democracy to be the only legitimate form of government on the basis that it alone promotes or safeguards intrinsic values like freedom, equality, and justice. On the other, skepticism toward the ordinary citizen's cognitive capacities remains a perennial concern. Qualms about the epistemic value of democracy have only been made more pertinent by a fundamental problem of deep epistemic disagreement which underlies the post-truth phenomenon. I argue that the democratic theorists who have sought to defend democracy on epistemic grounds have thus far neglected such deep and intractable disagreements. Without addressing this oversight, the epistemic democrat will find that collective decision-making processes quickly become paralyzed and will not be able to yield the epistemic benefits they promise. Hence, the work for epistemic democrats is to recognize and take into account the ramifications of epistemic disagreements so as to make a stronger case for epistemic democracy.
history & philosophy of science,social sciences, interdisciplinary
What problem does this paper attempt to address?