Skip to main content
padlock icon - secure page this page is secure


Buy Article:

$22.55 + tax (Refund Policy)

In The Social Contract, Rousseau asserts his infallibility thesis: that the general will can never err, and that one's position in the minority indicates that what one took the general will to be was not actually so. Several theorists have argued that the Condorcet Jury Theorem, which states that in a sufficiently large group the majority opinion on a yes/no question is highly likely to be correct, provides a way to interpret and justify Rousseau's bold claim. I argue that the Jury Theorem cannot be used to interpret the infallibility thesis, since Rousseau takes the majority opinion to be constitutive, and not merely strong evidence, of the content of the general will. Since there is no standard of correctness that is independent of the majority opinion, the Jury Theorem cannot be invoked to support Rousseau's claim. I suggest a different strategy for situating the infallibility thesis in The Social Contract.
No References
No Citations
No Supplementary Data
No Article Media
No Metrics

Keywords: Condorcet; Democratic theory; Jean-Jacques Rousseau; Jury Theorem; Political obligation; Social contract; general will; political authority

Document Type: Research Article

Affiliations: Department of Philosophy, Marquette University, Coughlin 132, Milwaukee, WI 53201-1881, USA., Email: [email protected]

Publication date: January 1, 2011

  • Access Key
  • Free content
  • Partial Free content
  • New content
  • Open access content
  • Partial Open access content
  • Subscribed content
  • Partial Subscribed content
  • Free trial content
Cookie Policy
Cookie Policy
Ingenta Connect website makes use of cookies so as to keep track of data that you have filled in. I am Happy with this Find out more