date: 2024-07-30T10:23:19Z
pdf:PDFVersion: 1.7
pdf:docinfo:title: Should We Vote in Non-Deterministic Elections?
xmp:CreatorTool: LaTeX with hyperref
dc:description: This article investigates reasons to participate in non-deterministic elections, where the outcomes incorporate elements of chance beyond mere tie-breaking. The background context situates this inquiry within democratic theory, specifically non-deterministic voting systems, which promise to re-evaluate fairness and power distribution among voting blocs. This study aims to explore the normative implications of such electoral systems and their impact on our moral duty to vote. We analyze instrumental reasons for voting, including prudential and act-consequentialist arguments, alongside non-instrumental reasons, assessing their validity in the context of non-deterministic systems. The results indicate that non-deterministic elections could strengthen the case for voting based on prudential and act-consequentialist grounds due to their proportional nature and the increased influence of each vote. We conclude that, while non-deterministic elections strengthen our duty to vote overall, they do not strengthen it for all the arguments in the literature. This paper contributes to the discourse on electoral systems by critically evaluating the moral obligation to vote in non-deterministic elections.
Keywords: political philosophy; voting; non-deterministic voting systems; democracy; moral obligation; instrumental value
access_permission:modify_annotations: true
access_permission:can_print_degraded: true
subject: This article investigates reasons to participate in non-deterministic elections, where the outcomes incorporate elements of chance beyond mere tie-breaking. The background context situates this inquiry within democratic theory, specifically non-deterministic voting systems, which promise to re-evaluate fairness and power distribution among voting blocs. This study aims to explore the normative implications of such electoral systems and their impact on our moral duty to vote. We analyze instrumental reasons for voting, including prudential and act-consequentialist arguments, alongside non-instrumental reasons, assessing their validity in the context of non-deterministic systems. The results indicate that non-deterministic elections could strengthen the case for voting based on prudential and act-consequentialist grounds due to their proportional nature and the increased influence of each vote. We conclude that, while non-deterministic elections strengthen our duty to vote overall, they do not strengthen it for all the arguments in the literature. This paper contributes to the discourse on electoral systems by critically evaluating the moral obligation to vote in non-deterministic elections.
dc:creator: Bob M. Jacobs and Jobst Heitzig
description: This article investigates reasons to participate in non-deterministic elections, where the outcomes incorporate elements of chance beyond mere tie-breaking. The background context situates this inquiry within democratic theory, specifically non-deterministic voting systems, which promise to re-evaluate fairness and power distribution among voting blocs. This study aims to explore the normative implications of such electoral systems and their impact on our moral duty to vote. We analyze instrumental reasons for voting, including prudential and act-consequentialist arguments, alongside non-instrumental reasons, assessing their validity in the context of non-deterministic systems. The results indicate that non-deterministic elections could strengthen the case for voting based on prudential and act-consequentialist grounds due to their proportional nature and the increased influence of each vote. We conclude that, while non-deterministic elections strengthen our duty to vote overall, they do not strengthen it for all the arguments in the literature. This paper contributes to the discourse on electoral systems by critically evaluating the moral obligation to vote in non-deterministic elections.
dcterms:created: 2024-07-16T14:29:36Z
Last-Modified: 2024-07-30T10:23:19Z
dcterms:modified: 2024-07-30T10:23:19Z
dc:format: application/pdf; version=1.7
title: Should We Vote in Non-Deterministic Elections?
xmpMM:DocumentID: uuid:9e26be77-4052-455a-929b-8904539ff975
Last-Save-Date: 2024-07-30T10:23:19Z
pdf:docinfo:creator_tool: LaTeX with hyperref
access_permission:fill_in_form: true
pdf:docinfo:keywords: political philosophy; voting; non-deterministic voting systems; democracy; moral obligation; instrumental value
pdf:docinfo:modified: 2024-07-30T10:23:19Z
meta:save-date: 2024-07-30T10:23:19Z
pdf:encrypted: false
dc:title: Should We Vote in Non-Deterministic Elections?
modified: 2024-07-30T10:23:19Z
cp:subject: This article investigates reasons to participate in non-deterministic elections, where the outcomes incorporate elements of chance beyond mere tie-breaking. The background context situates this inquiry within democratic theory, specifically non-deterministic voting systems, which promise to re-evaluate fairness and power distribution among voting blocs. This study aims to explore the normative implications of such electoral systems and their impact on our moral duty to vote. We analyze instrumental reasons for voting, including prudential and act-consequentialist arguments, alongside non-instrumental reasons, assessing their validity in the context of non-deterministic systems. The results indicate that non-deterministic elections could strengthen the case for voting based on prudential and act-consequentialist grounds due to their proportional nature and the increased influence of each vote. We conclude that, while non-deterministic elections strengthen our duty to vote overall, they do not strengthen it for all the arguments in the literature. This paper contributes to the discourse on electoral systems by critically evaluating the moral obligation to vote in non-deterministic elections.
pdf:docinfo:subject: This article investigates reasons to participate in non-deterministic elections, where the outcomes incorporate elements of chance beyond mere tie-breaking. The background context situates this inquiry within democratic theory, specifically non-deterministic voting systems, which promise to re-evaluate fairness and power distribution among voting blocs. This study aims to explore the normative implications of such electoral systems and their impact on our moral duty to vote. We analyze instrumental reasons for voting, including prudential and act-consequentialist arguments, alongside non-instrumental reasons, assessing their validity in the context of non-deterministic systems. The results indicate that non-deterministic elections could strengthen the case for voting based on prudential and act-consequentialist grounds due to their proportional nature and the increased influence of each vote. We conclude that, while non-deterministic elections strengthen our duty to vote overall, they do not strengthen it for all the arguments in the literature. This paper contributes to the discourse on electoral systems by critically evaluating the moral obligation to vote in non-deterministic elections.
Content-Type: application/pdf
pdf:docinfo:creator: Bob M. Jacobs and Jobst Heitzig
X-Parsed-By: org.apache.tika.parser.DefaultParser
creator: Bob M. Jacobs and Jobst Heitzig
meta:author: Bob M. Jacobs and Jobst Heitzig
dc:subject: political philosophy; voting; non-deterministic voting systems; democracy; moral obligation; instrumental value
meta:creation-date: 2024-07-16T14:29:36Z
created: Tue Jul 16 16:29:36 CEST 2024
access_permission:extract_for_accessibility: true
access_permission:assemble_document: true
xmpTPg:NPages: 15
Creation-Date: 2024-07-16T14:29:36Z
access_permission:extract_content: true
access_permission:can_print: true
meta:keyword: political philosophy; voting; non-deterministic voting systems; democracy; moral obligation; instrumental value
Author: Bob M. Jacobs and Jobst Heitzig
producer: pdfTeX-1.40.25
access_permission:can_modify: true
pdf:docinfo:producer: pdfTeX-1.40.25
pdf:docinfo:created: 2024-07-16T14:29:36Z