Against Analogy: Why Analogical Arguments in Support of Workplace Democracy Must Necessarily Fail. Issue 1 (1st June 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Frega, Roberto
• Is Part Of: Democratic theory. Volume 7:Issue 1(2020)
• Page Start: 1
• Page End: 26
• Publication Date: 2020-06-01
• Subjects: workplace democracy -- analogy -- parallel argument -- Robert Dahl -- social interactionism -- pragmatism; Democracy -- Periodicals; 321.8
• DOI: 10.3167/dt.2020.070102
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2332-8894

Abstract

Abstract: This article asks whether the analogy between state and firm is a promising strategy for promoting workplace democracy and provides a negative answer, explaining why analogical arguments are not a good strategy for justifying workplace democracy. The article contends that the state-firm analogy is misguided for at least three reasons: (1) it is structurally inconclusive, (2) it is based on a category mistake, and (3) it leads us away from the central question we should ask, which is: What would concretely imply, and what is required, in order to democratize the workplace? I begin by offering an interpretation of the state-firm analogy which shows that use of the analogical argument in Dahl's justification of workplace democracy engenders excessive and unnecessary theoretical costs which bear negatively on his conclusion. I then proceed to examine more recent contributions to the debate and show that supporters and critics of the state-firm analogy alike do not advance our understanding of the analogical argument. In the last part of the article I provide a general theoretical explanation of why arguments based on the state-firm analogy are not good candidates for defending workplace democracy.