The following list is a work-in-progress:
The common good = ideal constitution + real constitution (representing roughly the dynamic and static elements of the good respectively) = the good of the polis as both a practice of dual constitutionalism, and a list of ideal policy solutions. Whereas the static good as defined in the real constitution becomes dynamic through the practices of constitutionalism and the actions of the branches of government, the dynamic policy problems faced by the nation become relatively static after being resolved into the list of the ideal constitution. Both real and ideal constitutions are, thus, pervaded by both stasis and dynamism, realism and idealism. The global environmental commons is also part of the common good. Combining the idea of the commons with sustainability can provide a lens through which to reconceive the philosophy of law, as well as providing a firmer basis for international law. When nations have clearly defined national interests in the form of ideal constitutions, those interests can serve as baselines of national political centrism and accountability, as well as transparent international baselines of cooperation and accountability.
The polis is the personified political community of the people and the state combined, also known as the “nation.”
The general will is the vote tally/majority rule/aggregated individual interests.
Sovereignty is the achievement of rational and accountable government, and a state of dignity of the polis. Accountability increases with the proximity of the vote tally to the ideal constitution, which is the baseline of accountability itself and the narrative of centrism. Sovereignty, then, is indexed to accountability and it rises or falls in proportion with the proximity of the general will/vote tally to the policies of the ideal constitution. Sovereignty for the personified polis is analogous to self-mastery for individuals.
Government accountability is achievable through transparency and disciplined dual constitutionalism, meaning both real and ideal constitutions.
The ideal constitution is the same as the national interest, an open-sourced list of ideal policy solutions to the policy problems of the nation (or the polis). The federal ideal constitution is, thus, a description of what the country should do at the present time, which is a self-evident description of the evolving aspects of the common good. The states should also have ideal constitutions of their own, which means the United States should have 51 real constitutions and 101 ideal constitutions total. Each state should have an ideal constitution for itself and one for the federal government, which makes 100 ideal constitutions. The 101st ideal constitution would be the official federal one. The more complicated policies of the federal ideal constitution might be decided by a composite of the 50 state ideal-federal constitutions. Simpler federal policies, by contrast, may require simpler debates and documentation. Whereas both real and ideal constitutions need to be produced with standpoint diversity, ideal constitutions require standpoint diversity to find policy solutions using either objectivity, or the trans-ideological standard of sustainability as their decision criteria.
The civic mission of universities can be described interchangeably as ideal constitutionalism, or facilitating citizens’ pursuit of truth-for-self-government.
The Wisconsin Idea is the democratic operating system necessary for dual constitutionalism, and the WI 2.0 version centers on ideal constitutionalism as the civic mission of universities.
Sustainability is the name for the life-project of the polis, as well as a trans-ideological standard to serve as a fair and pragmatic criterion for decision-making where objectivity is not possible or relevant to the decision in question. Sustainability is a view-from-nowhere in the double sense of a utopian ideal, and in being analogous to objectivity in the scientific method, where the view from sustainability is like coming as close as possible to taking an objective point of view on everything. Just as science aims at objectivity, the ideal constitution should aim at sustainability and objectivity. The entire system of dual constitutionalism, by contrast, aims at the common good.
Countervailing power is the political core of the institutional separation of powers, the checks-and-balances system of both presidential and parliamentary governments, as well as the core of the US Congress and of parliaments in general, which are designed to produce standpoint diversity.
Standpoint diversity is the epistemological correlate of countervailing power, the method of democratic deliberation that produces the “unforced force of the better argument” in the words of Jürgen Habermas.
The narrative of political centrism in a given nation or state is epitomized by its ideal constitution, but may also include the democratic norms and discourse of constitutionalism.
Common good constitutionalism is dual, real-ideal constitutionalism that balances realism and idealism across the entire constitutional order, aims at the common good, and is also the disciplined practice of political centrism. The common good is not the same as the national interest, which is limited to the ideal constitution and the narrative of centrism. Whereas the ideal constitution aims at sustainability and objectivity (between which there is a hard-to-define amount of slippage), common good constitutionalism aims at the common good, which involves fidelity to the real constitution, a list of ideal policy positions, and the practice of dual constitutionalism.
The national interest = ideal constitution = the epitome of the narrative of centrism, all of which implies that the epitome of patriotism is the practice of ideal constitutionalism (in addition to military service). Wisconsin Idea 2.0 argues that the national interest is part of the “privileged class of common interests” that are “central features of the common good” as Waheed Hussain describes them in his essay, “The Common Good,” in The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Central features of the common good of the polis include ideal policies, the legal system, and, in the United States, the US Constitution.
Aiming: whereas science aims at the ideal of objectivity, ideal constitutions should aim at sustainability and objectivity simultaneously because sustainability is the life-project of the polis and a fair criterion for making decisions. Dual constitutionalism aims at the common good, which requires balancing realism and idealism, and includes the practices of constitutionalism, the norms of democratic deliberation, and the policy list of the ideal constitution.
Objectivity has numerous senses or versions, like truth, over which scholars disagree. I use objectivity loosely in the sense of truth-as-correspondence with the facts, but it is ultimately anti-foundational and probably near to pragmatist theories of truth. The utopian ideal of sustainability is analogous to objectivity in the scientific method in that it is homologous to taking an objective point of view on everything. While there is no ultimate “unity of science” or “theory of everything,” objectivity is still a useful ideal that lends overall coherence to scientific endeavor and makes real-world results possible. Sustainability is similar in that, whereas the view-from-nowhere of utopia/full objectivity doesn’t exist, the ideal of sustainability is so rigorous and severe that it functions with respect to civilization the way objectivity functions in the scientific method.
Realism focuses on truth as correspondence with the facts.
Idealism focuses on ideals as things desirable to achieve. The pursuit of objectivity in the scientific method is the idealistic attempt to get as close as possible to the facts, all of the facts. In the scientific method as well as everywhere else, idealism and realism depend on and presuppose each other. This is because realism and idealism are among the fundamental categories of thought itself.
With that in mind, see Thomas Nagel’s Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature is Almost Certainly False for a discussion of the (likely) teleological dimension of reality. This topic relates to the main thinkers of the American Pragmatist tradition, which is why Jürgen Habermas’s latest book discusses Charles Sanders Peirce (the American Aristotle), and his earlier English collection of essays, Time of Transitions, discusses the recent German revival of interest in John Dewey. As Brandon Bloch writes in his review of Habermas’s This Too a History of Philosophy:
“For Peirce, scientific knowledge obtained solely in intersubjective understandings. Language was the essential medium coordinating between the external world and the research of the scientific community. Habermas, finally, draws a line to his own writings. Whereas Peirce uncovered linguistic learning processes in science and technology, Habermas’s own work since the 1980s has shown how communication fosters progress in moral and political life as well.”
Democratic epistemology refers to the thought process of democracy, how we know what we know and how to formulate a coherent national policy vision based on that knowledge. Ideal constitutionalism is the theory and practice of democratic epistemology. Whereas epistemology is the study of knowledge, constitutionalism refers to the institutions through which knowledge passes. To make an analogy with human beings, epistemology happens in the brain and constitutionalism is the coordinated movements and processes of the body. Both taken together, a person, is analogous to the polis.
Constitutionalism typically means adherence to a system of constitutional government. Wisconsin Idea 2.0 emphasizes constitutionalism as the communication and logistics system of liberal democracy. The practice of constitutionalism, including dual constitutionalism, is for the common good of the polis overall.
Democratic capabilities include