nishio How do you integrate opinions when people have different weightings of what constitutes legitimacy? Oh, I think you are reproducing the same composition, just at a higher level of abstraction.
nishio I feel like this “there are multiple grounds for legitimacy” is a useful perspective for those who create or transform things anew, so I’ll sort it out later.
For example, if someone disagrees that “there is no precedent”, then he is standing on “legitimacy by continuation”, so he could conceivably use other legitimacy sources.
nishio For example, use “Legitimacy through performance” after doing it on your own and getting results, ignore the person and use the existing legitimacy legitimacy through process” to make a decision through the decision-making process, “legitimacy through fairness” to show that the majority agrees with a fair vote, etc.
nishio Legitimacy, after all, is not something that exists objectively, but subjectively within each individual, and in situations where there is real benefit in making it align In such a situation, it is useful to build up people’s subjective view that “this is legitimate,” and this may correspond to the term “fostering a sense of conviction” and so on.
One of the most useful things I learned at MOT was Relativization of correctness.
This page is auto-translated from /nishio/正統性の相対化 using DeepL. If you looks something interesting but the auto-translated English is not good enough to understand it, feel free to let me know at @nishio_en. I’m very happy to spread my thought to non-Japanese readers.