The dynamics of dominance and compromise
0
Citation
49
Reference
10
Related Paper
Keywords:
Compromise
Dominance (genetics)
Abstract In this article, I offer a novel account of why compromising in politics is likely to involve the kind of politically admirable but morally wrongful behavior at stake in the dirty hands thesis. On the view I defend, politicians do not dirty their hands just because they compromise on matters of principle. Rather, when forging a political compromise, negotiators can either comply with the requirements of ethical compromise-making or abide by the special obligations they have to their representees, but will struggle to satisfy both demands. As a result, subsequent to such compromises, residual moral claims about how the compromise was negotiated will almost inevitably emerge and compromise-makers will not be able to explain their conduct in a way that can cancel these grievances. It is in this sense that forging political compromises can be “dirty” even if choosing to compromise is the politically responsible thing to do.
Compromise
Cite
Citations (8)
Abstract The study of compromise in career decision-making has been neglected. Out of Pryor's adoption of Gottfredson's compromise formulation, a programme of research was undertaken to investigate the basic dimensions of career compromise. The results of four separate studies are reported, investigating compromise conceptions, compromise plans, compromise choices and compromise interventions. These data support the importance of the three Gottfredson dimensions — psychological characteristics, prestige and sex-type-in the process of career compromise. The major deficiency of the Gottfredson compromise model is the need for elaboration of several of its aspects, such as sex differences in compromise strategies, 'refusal to compromise', the existence of more than one compromise paradigm and the interrelatedness of the compromise dimensions.
Compromise
Cite
Citations (4)
This article examines the relationship between compromise and fairness, and considers in particular why, if a fair outcome to a conflict is available, the conflict should still be subject to compromise. It sets out the defining features of compromise and explains how fair compromise differs from both principled and pragmatic compromise. The fairness relating to compromise can be of two types: procedural or end-state. It is the coherence of end-state fairness with compromise that proves the more puzzling case. We offer reasons why people should be allowed to resolve conflicting or competing claims through compromise, even if compromise comes at the expense of end-state fairness, but we resist the suggestion that the primary rationale for compromise is to be found in non-ideal circumstances.
Compromise
Cite
Citations (29)
Abstract The international community has many reasons to promote compromise between the parties to internal conflicts. Yet to do so effectively, the international community ought to treat principled rather than strategic compromise as its default position. To make this case, we begin by defining ‘compromise’ and by distinguishing principled from strategic compromise. We then defend the idea of principled compromise against the realist who thinks that that idea is implausible. We conclude by offering a number of practical reasons why principled compromise ought to be preferred. Our argument does not deny that strategic compromise will sometimes be the only option. But, unlike principled compromise, strategic compromise does not provide the parties with any particular reason to look beyond their own particular concerns or to give any ground beyond what is absolutely necessary.
Compromise
Argument (complex analysis)
Cite
Citations (6)
In the West,compromise is not only a common phenomenon,but also has been accepted by western culture.In many countries,compromise becomes the value and tradition cherished by the public and society.The cause of this is that compromise is considered to be closely related with liberty and democracy which is the two key ideas of western society.As for liberty,compromise is the only way to settle conflict except violence,and to settle conflict in a compromise way is the basic tendency of liberal democratic politics,so compromise is the price that has to be paid for liberty.As for democracy,compromise is consistent with the key ideas of democratic politics such as people’s consent and protecting minority, so the spirit of compromise has some important significances in ensuring the healthy operation of democracy,so it’s said that compromise is the important spiritual condition of democracy.
Compromise
Representative democracy
Liberal democracy
Cite
Citations (0)
This article analyses the role of the compromise in ethics. A compromise has
to do with the choice between two conflicting norms in a borderline situation.
Since these norms are in conflict with each other a conflict of interest is
created. It then necessitates a choice between one of the norms in a borderline
situation. To this choice is referred to as a choice between the lesser of two
evils. This is where the compromise comes into play. Six ethical issues are
addressed to investigate how the compromise fits into ethics. These questions
are asked: whether the compromise is a mechanical act?; how to identify the
lesser of two evils?; does the compromise address a boarderline situation?;
how to address guilt caused by a boaderline situation?; is the compromise an
act of obedience? and can't the compromise become an ethical lifestyle?
Compromise
Cite
Citations (0)
Abstract Is it possible to reconcile the principled commitments of partisanship with a larger set of institutional constraints? What burdens of compromise does the task of government introduce, and how are they best negotiated? This chapter explores the nature of partisan compromise, the relationship between compromise and integrity, and the challenge of compromising with one’s political adversaries. It further asks whether partisan compromise should be understood as principled or pragmatic and offers an account of partisan virtue that steers a middle ground between a sectarian approach that deems all compromise unacceptable and an opportunistic one that empties the party of its foundational commitments.
Compromise
Cite
Citations (0)
Compromise
Cite
Citations (0)
Abstract This chapter develops what it means to compromise in politics and how political compromise is distinctive from other ways of resolving political differences. The virtues of compromise are discussed as well as its perils. The reasons why we might see Americans as wary about compromise are outlined. While people’s ideological motivations may discourage the pursuit of compromise, this chapter argues that people think about compromise in both partisan and principled ways. Compromise is a democratic norm, one Americans support not because it benefits their personal stakes, but also because they believe it is a desirable way to resolve political disputes.
Compromise
Cite
Citations (0)
This book chapter examines the history of the passage of the Compromise of 1850 and the nature of the Compromise. The chapter argues that the Compromise almost entirely favored slavery, and that rather than a compromise, it was an appeasement of the slave South. By any measure, the Compromise of 1850 failed to achieve its major goal - to defuse sectional conflict over slavery. The compromise stimulated a decade of confrontations between northerners and the federal government over the fugitive slave law and even led to Northerns making states' rights arguments.
Compromise
Appeasement
Cite
Citations (0)