Authority, freedom and liberal judgment: The presumptions and presumptuousness of Whately, mill and to Cqueville

Abstract

This essay explores the conflict between individualism and communitarianism, attempting to clarify the nature of the conflict and its implications for rhetorical theory. The conflict is examined as it was manifested in a historical debate between liberals and conservatives during and after the French Revolution. Where liberals privileged the unencumbered judgment of autonomous individuals, conservatives attempted to marginalize individual dissent, defending “prejudice, “ “precedent, “ and “presumption. “Against this background, Richard Whately's notions of “presumption” and “burden of proof can be seen as an attempt to mediate the conflict between individualism and communitarianism. Whately's suggestion was developed farther in the works of John Stuart Mill and Alexis de Tocqueville. For Mill and Tocqueville, presumption and burden of proof define a point of equilibrium in an ongoing dialectic between communal allegiance and individual judgement.