Main Page Contact Register Log In


> How is it different from saying that the best way of governing a country is to have small subset of its population - the "enlightened ones" dictate the rules?

It's not philosophically different. It's (debatably) different pragmatically, in terms of the risks of the "enlightened ones" being mistaken or self-serving, or producing negative-sum conflict.

In any case, I'd argue that having morality dictated by the "enlightened ones" is exactly what the "Living Document" theory of the Constitution amounts to. So far I'm mostly happy with the results despite have meta-level misgivings.