| ID | 110549 |
| Title Proper | Concepts of representation |
| Language | ENG |
| Author | Rehfeld, Andrew |
| Publication | 2011. |
| Summary / Abstract (Note) | In this reply to Jane Mansbridge's "Clarifying the Concept of Representation" in this issue (American Political Science Review 2011). I argue that our main disagreements are conceptual, and are traceable to the attempt to treat the concept of representation as a "single highly complex concept" as Hanna Pitkin once put it. Instead, I argue, it would be more useful to develop the various concepts that emphasize the underlying forms of representation. Against the view that empirical regularity should guide concept formation, I suggest that the failure to find instances of the cases I conceptualize is not itself a reason to reject them. Instead, I argue in favor of concepts that emphasize one side or other of a relationship, rather than treating both sides simultaneously, defending the view that "promissory" and "anticipatory" may usefully describe the activity of "representing" but ought to emphasize only one side of the representative-voter relationship. I also explain why adding substantive accounts of representation to any of Mansbridge's modifying concepts dilutes their practical value. I conclude by indicating the importance of developing concepts that stretch beyond the democratic contexts that feature prominently in her response. |
| `In' analytical Note | American Political Science Review Vol. 105, No. 3; Aug 2011: p.631-641 |
| Journal Source | American Political Science Review Vol. 105, No. 3; Aug 2011: p.631-641 |
| Key Words | Concepts of Representation ; Representation |