Epistemic and doxastic conceptions of democracy

Abstract

A very plausible answer to the question about its justification, is that democracy is the most appropriate method to take decisions that meet citizens’ interests. By following this quite simple strategy, many democratic theories embrace an epistemic claim. Nonetheless, many other theories follow a different path. They explain and justify the adoption of democratic procedures appealing to the right of citizens to participate in the formation of a collective will. If former theories are epistemic, the later may be called doxastic, because legitimacy does not depend on the correctness of decisions, but on the mere expression of preferences. The aim of this paper is to sketch this distinction. The hypothesis is that each of these two approaches is connected with a different understanding of the motivational forces that sustain a democratic public sphere.