page_208 - Page 208...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–2. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
< previous page page_208 next page > Page 208 affected citizens. It becomes a matter of trading value judgements about what premises should influence plans and what consequences are desirable (or otherwise). In order to put recalcitrant planners into a position where they have to admit their boundary judgements, Ulrich advocates the polemical employment of boundary judgements. This idea stems from Kant's discussion of the "polemical employment of reason". For Kant an argument is polemical if it is used for solely critical intent against a dogmatically asserted validity claim. Affected citizens can employ boundary judgements against planners in this sort of way. They can assert alternative boundary judgements against the planners in the full knowledge that these reflect only personal value judgements. This is quite good enough to shift the burden of proof onto the planners and to leave them floundering to prove the superiority of their own boundary judgements. Acting in this way, the affected are able to demonstrate three essential points:
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
Image of page 2
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 04/21/2011 for the course MGT 03 taught by Professor Kasra during the Spring '11 term at Tanta University.

Page1 / 4

page_208 - Page 208...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 2. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online