The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Collective Decision Making in Rousseau, Kant, Hegel, and Mill
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Assuming Dyke's interpretation is correct, namely that in the Kantian framework one man with an autonomous will could in principle legitimately legislate for all, Kant's argument as to the irrationality of suicide (and self-punishment) would preclude such a man from subjecting himself to a form of punishment that entails his own death.”
From Kant on Capital Punishment and Suicide (2006) · cites this paper as Dyke (1969), 28
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Kant on Capital Punishment and Suicide
Ataner, A. (2006) · Kant Studien · doi:10.1515/kant.2006.028 · Cited by 25
Metadata
- Authors
- Dyke, C.
- Corresponding author
- Dyke, C.
- Venue
- Ethics
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 1969-10
- Volume
- 80
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 21-37
- ISSN
- 0014-1704 (ISSN-L)
- 1539-297X
- OpenAlex
- W2114510039
- Cited by
- 6
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2019: 1
- FWCI
- 8.28
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Ethics (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Philosophy and Ethics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophical Ethics and Theory
- Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
- Keywords
- group decision making, Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Immanuel Kant, Hegel, John Stuart Mill, social contract, political philosophy, democracy, deliberation
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Collective Decision Making in Rousseau, Kant, Hegel, and Mill. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/291745
- The paper
- Dyke, C. (1969). Collective Decision Making in Rousseau, Kant, Hegel, and Mill. Ethics. https://doi.org/10.1086/291745
