This Article addresses three perplexing problems about proposed principles of self-restraint for political decision and advocacy within liberal democracies. It considers the nature of convictions that are based on highly personal experiences and asks what their political status should be. It explores the subtle relationship between proposed principles of restraint and overarching religious and other comprehensive views. It argues that a plausible principle of restraint must appeal to people with various religious and other comprehensive views and must be suited to the particular conditions of a given society.
Grounds for Political Judgment: The Status of Personal Experience and the Autonomy and Generality of Principles of Restraint,
San Diego L. Rev.
Available at: https://digital.sandiego.edu/sdlr/vol30/iss4/3