CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 287Political Philosophy and EthicsPolitical Theory and DemocracyPhilosophical Ethics and Theory

Rule Over None I: What Justifies Democracy?

KOLODNY, NIKO·2014·Philosophy & Public Affairs
DOI 10.1111/papa.12035
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/papa.12035

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Members of the demos should have an equal opportunity to influence the decisions reached.

    “Beyond this, they should have an equal opportunity to influence the decisions reached (see Erman, 2014, pp. 539-42;Song, 2012, pp. 45-46; for a longer discussion of the role that the idea of equal influence plays in justifying democracy, see; Kolodny, 2014).”

    From Reconceiving the democratic boundary problem (2020) · cites this paper as Kolodny, 2014

Cited by

Sorted by citations

  • Reconceiving the democratic boundary problem

    Miller, D. (2020) · Philosophy Compass · doi:10.1111/phc3.12707 · Cited by 59 · see citing works

    “Beyond this, they should have an equal opportunity to influence the decisions reached (see Erman, 2014, pp. 539–42; Song, 2012, pp. 45–46; for a longer discussion of the role that the idea of equal influence plays in justifying democracy, see; Kolodny, 2014).”
    Background

Authors
KOLODNY, N.
Corresponding author
KOLODNY, NIKO
ORCID
KOLODNY, NIKO
Venue
Philosophy & Public Affairs
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2014-06
Volume
42
Issue
3
Pages
195-229
ISSN
  • 0048-3915 (ISSN-L)
  • 1088-4963
DOI
10.1111/papa.12035
OpenAlex
W1568231200
Cited by
287
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 41 · 2024: 85 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 37 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 22 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 2
FWCI
28.23
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor, 198 d)
Locations
  • Philosophy & Public Affairs (publishedVersion)
  • ANU Open Research (Australian National University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Philosophy and Ethics
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › Political Theory and Democracy
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Philosophical Ethics and Theory
Keywords
justification of democracy, rule of law, political legitimacy, democratic theory

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