The Union outcontrols state factions

Published·11 premises·15 claims

Unknown

The conclusion: Unknown

Falls short

The argument: Falls short — not enough was settled

Contents11 premises

Keep the contents in place

Premises

1The case for the Union

Conclusion

2Scale joined to federal design

3Vindication of the federal plan

4Why a safeguard is needed

5Interested judges of their own cause

6Representation scaled up

7From assembly to representation

8Controlling effects, not causes

9Two paths from an incurable cause

10No cure by making men alike

11From definition to origin

Responses

Collapse premise

Conclusion

The case for the Union

Show graph for premise "The case for the Union"

Premise details for "The case for the Union"

The Union outcontrols state factions

Details for "The Union outcontrols state factions"

The Union’s greater size and structure make factious combinations harder to form, coordinate, and spread than within the individual States.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

Source — Based on origin text "Hence, it clearly appears, that the same advantage which a republic has over a democracy, in controlling the effects of faction, is enjoyed by a large over a small republic,--is enjoyed by the Union over the States composing it.". Original claim

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

Unknown by default — not your assignment. Derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown. Click to edit.

Collapse premise

Scale joined to federal design

Show graph for premise "Scale joined to federal design"

Premise details for "Scale joined to federal design"

The Union outcontrols state factions

Details for "The Union outcontrols state factions"

The Union’s greater size and structure make factious combinations harder to form, coordinate, and spread than within the individual States.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

The federal Constitution balances scale

Details for "The federal Constitution balances scale"

The federal Constitution usefully divides authority by sending great and aggregate interests to the national government and local and particular interests to state legislatures.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

Source — Based on origin text "The federal Constitution forms a happy combination in this respect; the great and aggregate interests being referred to the national, the local and particular to the State legislatures.". Original claim

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

and

Large republics control faction better

Details for "Large republics control faction better"

A large republic is more favorable than a small republic for choosing proper representatives and for preventing oppressive faction because it contains more interests, more candidates, and more obstacles to conspiracy.

This claim has no citation and isn't the consequent of any premise.

Source — Based on origin text "Extend the sphere, and you take in a greater variety of parties and interests; you make it less probable that a majority of the whole will have a common motive to invade the rights of other citizens". Original claim

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

Collapse premise

Vindication of the federal plan

Show graph for premise "Vindication of the federal plan"

Premise details for "Vindication of the federal plan"

The federal Constitution balances scale

Details for "The federal Constitution balances scale"

The federal Constitution usefully divides authority by sending great and aggregate interests to the national government and local and particular interests to state legislatures.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

The Union checks faction

Details for "The Union checks faction"

A well-constructed Union tends to break and control the violence of faction, making it a safeguard against domestic faction and insurrection.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

Source — Based on origin text "AMONG the numerous advantages promised by a well-constructed Union, none deserves to be more accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the violence of faction.". Original claim

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

and

The Union outcontrols state factions

Details for "The Union outcontrols state factions"

The Union’s greater size and structure make factious combinations harder to form, coordinate, and spread than within the individual States.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

Collapse premise

Why a safeguard is needed

Show graph for premise "Why a safeguard is needed"

Premise details for "Why a safeguard is needed"

The Union checks faction

Details for "The Union checks faction"

A well-constructed Union tends to break and control the violence of faction, making it a safeguard against domestic faction and insurrection.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

Majority factions can oppress

Details for "Majority factions can oppress"

When a faction includes a majority, popular government can let it sacrifice the public good and others’ rights to its ruling passion or interest.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

Source — Based on origin text "When a majority is included in a faction, the form of popular government, on the other hand, enables it to sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest both the public good and the rights of other citizens.". Original claim

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

and

Faction ruins popular government

Details for "Faction ruins popular government"

Instability, injustice, and confusion are the mortal diseases under which popular governments have perished, and faction drives those harms.

This claim has no citation and isn't the consequent of any premise.

Source — Based on origin text "The instability, injustice, and confusion introduced into the public councils, have, in truth, been the mortal diseases under which popular governments have everywhere perished". Original claim

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

Collapse premise

Interested judges of their own cause

Show graph for premise "Interested judges of their own cause"

Premise details for "Interested judges of their own cause"

Majority factions can oppress

Details for "Majority factions can oppress"

When a faction includes a majority, popular government can let it sacrifice the public good and others’ rights to its ruling passion or interest.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

Self-interest biases judgment

Details for "Self-interest biases judgment"

A person cannot be a judge in his own cause because interest biases judgment and may corrupt integrity; the same problem applies even more strongly to legislative bodies deciding on classes that include their own members.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

Source — Based on origin text "No man is allowed to be a judge in his own cause, because his interest would certainly bias his judgment, and, not improbably, corrupt his integrity.". Original claim

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

True by default — not your assignment. Derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown. Click to edit.

Axiom: Domain Rule

and

Property creates interests

Details for "Property creates interests"

Unequal distribution of property creates distinct interests and parties, and regulating those interests is a principal task of modern legislation.

This claim has no citation and isn't the consequent of any premise.

Source — Based on origin text "But the most common and durable source of factions has been the various and unequal distribution of property. Those who hold and those who are without property have ever formed distinct interests in society.". Original claim

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

Collapse premise

Representation scaled up

Show graph for premise "Representation scaled up"

Premise details for "Representation scaled up"

The Union outcontrols state factions

Details for "The Union outcontrols state factions"

The Union’s greater size and structure make factious combinations harder to form, coordinate, and spread than within the individual States.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

Republics can cure faction

Details for "Republics can cure faction"

A republic, which uses representation, offers a cure for faction that a pure democracy lacks.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

Source — Based on origin text "A republic, by which I mean a government in which the scheme of representation takes place, opens a different prospect, and promises the cure for which we are seeking.". Original claim

U → T

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

This is unknown by default; the evaluator inferred true from surrounding decisions. Click to edit.

and

Large republics control faction better

Details for "Large republics control faction better"

This claim has no citation and isn't the consequent of any premise.

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

Collapse premise

From assembly to representation

Show graph for premise "From assembly to representation"

Premise details for "From assembly to representation"

Republics can cure faction

Details for "Republics can cure faction"

A republic, which uses representation, offers a cure for faction that a pure democracy lacks.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

U → T

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

This is unknown by default; the evaluator inferred true from surrounding decisions. Click to edit.

Pure democracy cannot cure faction

Details for "Pure democracy cannot cure faction"

A pure democracy, with citizens assembling and governing in person, can admit no cure for faction and is prone to turbulence, contention, insecurity, and property violations.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

Source — Based on origin text "a pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction". Original claim

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

Axiom: Definition

Collapse premise

Controlling effects, not causes

Show graph for premise "Controlling effects, not causes"

Premise details for "Controlling effects, not causes"

Republics can cure faction

Details for "Republics can cure faction"

A republic, which uses representation, offers a cure for faction that a pure democracy lacks.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

U → T

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

This is unknown by default; the evaluator inferred true from surrounding decisions. Click to edit.

Liberty cannot be removed

Details for "Liberty cannot be removed"

Destroying liberty would be a worse remedy than the disease, because liberty is essential to political life even though it nourishes faction.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

Source — Based on origin text "It could never be more truly said than of the first remedy, that it was worse than the disease. Liberty is to faction what air is to fire, an aliment without which it instantly expires.". Original claim

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

Axiom: Background Assumption

and

Faction has two remedies

Details for "Faction has two remedies"

The mischiefs of faction can be cured only by removing its causes or by controlling its effects.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

Source — Based on origin text "There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: the one, by removing its causes; the other, by controlling its effects.". Original claim

U → T

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

This is unknown by default; the evaluator inferred true from surrounding decisions. Click to edit.

Collapse premise

Two paths from an incurable cause

Show graph for premise "Two paths from an incurable cause"

Premise details for "Two paths from an incurable cause"

Faction has two remedies

Details for "Faction has two remedies"

The mischiefs of faction can be cured only by removing its causes or by controlling its effects.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

Source — Based on origin text "There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: the one, by removing its causes; the other, by controlling its effects.". Original claim

U → T

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

This is unknown by default; the evaluator inferred true from surrounding decisions. Click to edit.

Faction arises from human nature

Details for "Faction arises from human nature"

The latent causes of faction are sown in human nature and are activated by religion, politics, leadership rivalries, and unequal property.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

Source — Based on origin text "The latent causes of faction are thus sown in the nature of man; and we see them everywhere brought into different degrees of activity, according to the different circumstances of civil society.". Original claim

U → T

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

This is unknown by default; the evaluator inferred true from surrounding decisions. Click to edit.

Collapse premise

No cure by making men alike

Show graph for premise "No cure by making men alike"

Premise details for "No cure by making men alike"

Faction arises from human nature

Details for "Faction arises from human nature"

The latent causes of faction are sown in human nature and are activated by religion, politics, leadership rivalries, and unequal property.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

U → T

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

This is unknown by default; the evaluator inferred true from surrounding decisions. Click to edit.

Uniform opinion is impossible

Details for "Uniform opinion is impossible"

It is impracticable to make every citizen hold the same opinions, passions, and interests, because human reason is fallible and unequal property interests arise naturally.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

Source — Based on origin text "The second expedient is as impracticable as the first would be unwise. As long as the reason of man continues fallible, and he is at liberty to exercise it, different opinions will be formed.". Original claim

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

Axiom: Background Assumption

Collapse premise

From definition to origin

Show graph for premise "From definition to origin"

Premise details for "From definition to origin"

Faction arises from human nature

Details for "Faction arises from human nature"

The latent causes of faction are sown in human nature and are activated by religion, politics, leadership rivalries, and unequal property.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

U → T

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

This is unknown by default; the evaluator inferred true from surrounding decisions. Click to edit.

Faction serves adverse interests

Details for "Faction serves adverse interests"

A faction is a group of citizens, majorities or minorities, united by passion or interest adverse to the rights of others or the community’s permanent aggregate interests.

No citations. The argument supports this claim through a premise that concludes it, or an axiom.

Source — Based on origin text "By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.". Original claim

Default — derived from how this claim is used: grounded claims (citations, axioms, and claims they directly support) start true; claims the argument still has to reach start unknown.

Axiom: Definition

Responses (0)

No published responses yet.

About this source

This argument is a Proposit showcase: a formal reconstruction of a canonical work by James Madison. The original text is that author’s; the analysis below it is ours.

About: Federalist No. 10

Federalist No. 10 (1787) is James Madison's essay on the danger that factions — groups united by a common interest adverse to the rights of others or to the common good — pose to popular government. Madison argues that the causes of faction cannot be removed without destroying liberty itself, so a well-constructed government must instead control its effects. His remedy is the large commercial republic: by extending the sphere over a great many diverse interests, and by filtering popular will through elected representatives, an extensive union makes it far harder for any single faction to form a tyrannical majority.

Original summary for this showcase, informed by public sources including Wikipedia.

What Proposit adds is the structure: the work’s reasoning restated as explicit claims and premises, with each inference laid out so it can be examined, cited and disputed on its own terms. Readers can respond to any individual premise rather than to the work as a whole.

Maximize details

Show details

Maximize details

Argument details

Forks

Argument history

Argument participants

Propositional formulae

Source text

Argument details

Version 1·Curated showcase

Fork Argument

Share Argument

Report Argument

Curated argument

This argument was published by the Proposit staff as a way to share the Proposit representation of famous historical arguments and documents.Think this misrepresents the original? Tell us.

About

About the author

James Madison

James Madison (1751–1836) was an American statesman, political theorist, and the fourth President of the United States. A principal architect of the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, he earned the title "Father of the Constitution." With Alexander Hamilton and John Jay he wrote The Federalist, a series of essays defending the proposed Constitution to the people of New York. His thinking on faction, representation, and the separation of powers remains foundational to American constitutional theory.

Original summary for this showcase, informed by public sources including Wikipedia.

About this document

About: Federalist No. 10

Original summary for this showcase, informed by public sources including Wikipedia.

Source text

J. Madison, The Federalist No. 10: The Utility of the Union as a Safeguard Against Domestic Faction and Insurrection, New York, NY, USA: The New-York Packet, 1787.3,047 words · 15 traced passagesThe text this argument was built from. Open it to read it, step through the passages its premises and claims trace back to, or find a phrase in it.

Open origin document

Forks

Argument history

Participants

Propositional formulae