Is Epistocracy Irrational?

Gibbons, Adam F.

doi:10.26556/jesp.v21i2.1581

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, rational irrationality is of course best viewed as an account of political irrationality rather than political ignorance per se. Notably, not all politically irrational agents are politically ignorant, though (rational) political irrationality may explain the manner in which some political agents are selectively ignorant (Gibbons, 2022;Hannon, 2022). Thanks to an anonymous referee for discussion on this point.…”

Section: Giavazzi (2022)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Political ignorance is both rational and radical

Gibbons

2023

Synthese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It is commonly held that political ignorance is rational, a response to the high costs and low benefits of acquiring political information. But many recent critics of the claim that political ignorance is rational instead urge that it is a simple consequence of agents not concerning themselves with the acquisition of political information whatsoever. According to such critics, political ignorance is inadvertent radical ignorance rather than a rational response to the incentives faced by agents in democracies. And since political ignorance is not a response to incentives, these critics urge, it cannot be ameliorated by incentivizing the acquisition of political information. This paper has two goals. First, I show that these seemingly competing accounts of political ignorance are in fact complementary, together explaining much political ignorance. Indeed, there is a sense in which political ignorance can be both rational and radical at the same time. Second, I more closely examine the relationship between incentives, kinds of political ignorance, and the acquisition of political information. On the one hand, from the fact that political ignorance is rational it does not follow that it can be overcome by incentivizing the acquisition of information.On the other hand, from the fact that political ignorance is radical it does not follow that it cannot be overcome by incentivizing the acquisition of information. Lastly, the complexity of the information in question is more relevant to determining whether ignorance can be overcome than whether such ignorance is rational or radical.

show abstract

Section: Giavazzi (2022)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Political ignorance is both rational and radical

Gibbons

2023

Synthese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…25 For an outline of several different forms of epistocracy, see Brennan (2016). See also López-Guerra (2014), Jeffrey (2018), Mulligan (2018), Manor (2022), andGibbons (2022a). For an overview of the empirical literature documenting voter ignorance, see Caplan (2007).…”

Section: What Can We Do About Bad Language In Politics?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Bad language makes good politics

Gibbons¹

2023

Inquiry

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Politics abounds with bad language: lying and bullshitting, grandstanding and virtue signaling, code words and dogwhistles, and more. But why is there so much bad language in politics?And what, if anything, can we do about it? In this paper I show how these two questions are connected.Politics is full of bad language because existing social and political institutions are structured in such a way that the production of bad language becomes rational. In principle, by modifying these institutions we can reduce the prevalence of bad language. However, as I show, such practical efforts are fraught with difficulties. After first outlining an account of bad language (Section 1), I examine the rationality of three different types of bad language: inaccurate language, insincere language, and unclear language (Section 2). Next, I discuss the possibility of implementing institutional reforms to improve the quality of political discourse (Section 3). However, I then outline and discuss two serious complications for institutional reforms-namely, they create risk of abuse, and they could preclude instances of seemingly bad language that, in fact, are socially beneficial (Section 4). I conclude with some thoughts about how to pursue institutional reform in an appropriately circumspect manner (Section 5).

show abstract

“…The Platonic utopia of a Republic ruled by the brightest individuals of the polis has contemporary advocates in academic ranks (e.g. Brennan, 2011Brennan, , 2016Gibbons, 2022). Defenders of epistocracy, a political system in which the highly educated or knowledgeable monopolize political power, have proposed different strategies to minimize the political influence of the less educated (for a review, see Klocksiem, 2019).…”

Section: Democr Atic R Igh Ts a N D Fa Ir R Epr Esen Tationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Not all ballots should be considered equal: How education‐based dehumanization undermines the democratic social contract

Sainz,

Vázquez

2023

British J Social Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Less educated people are viewed negatively and their opinions are belittled in our society. Besides, along with other groups, they are underrepresented in the political arena which questions the legitimacy of democratic systems. Despite the existence of education‐based devaluation, research on how people dehumanize individuals and groups with lesser education and minimize their democratic rights is scarce. In this project, we provide correlational evidence that less (vs. highly) educated individuals and groups are dehumanized (Study 1a, N = 304) and their democratic rights (voting, running for office) are questioned (Study 1b, N = 504). Furthermore, we identified that dehumanization tendencies of the less (vs. highly) educated targets predict support for denying them voting rights or the capability to run for public candidacies (Study 2, N = 447). Finally, an experimental study confirmed that the target's educational background influences attributions of humanity, which in turn seem to affect the denial of democratic rights to the target (Study 3, N = 470). These findings suggest that education‐based dehumanization might undermine the inalienable democratic rights of lesser educated individuals and groups thus endangering the foundations of democratic systems.

show abstract

Is Epistocracy Irrational?

Cited by 5 publications

References 0 publications

Political ignorance is both rational and radical

Political ignorance is both rational and radical

Bad language makes good politics

Not all ballots should be considered equal: How education‐based dehumanization undermines the democratic social contract

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About