The ends of deliberation: Meta-consensus and inter-subjective rationality as ideal outcomes

被引:91
作者
Niemeyer, Simon [1 ]
Dryzek, John S. [1 ]
机构
[1] Australian Natl Univ, RSSS, Dept Polit Sci, Canberra, ACT 0200, Australia
关键词
meta-consensus; inter-subjective rationality; deliberative democracy; consensus; subjectivity; deliberative outcomes; INFORMATION; DEMOCRACY;
D O I
10.1002/j.1662-6370.2007.tb00087.x
中图分类号
D0 [政治学、政治理论];
学科分类号
0302 ; 030201 ;
摘要
Normative deliberative theory has contributed much to an understanding of ideal procedural standards, but there is considerable uncertainty regarding the appropriate nature of desired deliberative outcomes. In this paper we identify two inter-related concepts of meta-consensus and inter-subjective rationality as outcomes that an authentic deliberative process ought to produce. Importantly, these deliberative ends are consistent with ideal deliberative procedure. They are also empirically tractable, where preference transformation can be described in terms of underlying values, and judgments. Methods for assessing deliberative ends are provided and demonstrated using a case study.
引用
收藏
页码:497 / 526
页数:30
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1983, SOUR GRAPES STUDIES
[2]  
Arendt Hannah, 1961, PAST FUTURE 6 EXERCI
[3]  
Benhabib Seyla., 1996, DEMOCRACY DIFFERENCE, P67
[5]   Survey article: The coming of age of deliberative democracy [J].
Bohman, J .
JOURNAL OF POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY, 1998, 6 (04) :400-425
[6]  
Brown S., 1980, POLITICAL SUBJECTIVITY: APPLICATIONS OF Q METHODOLOGY IN POLITICAL SCIENCE
[7]   A conceptual definition and theoretical model of public deliberation in small face-to-face groups [J].
Burkhalter, S ;
Gastil, J ;
Kelshaw, T .
COMMUNICATION THEORY, 2002, 12 (04) :398-422
[8]   AN EPISTEMIC CONCEPTION OF DEMOCRACY [J].
COHEN, J .
ETHICS, 1986, 97 (01) :26-38
[9]  
Converse P.E., 1970, The Quantitative Analysis of Social Problems, V168, P189
[10]  
Converse Philip E., 1964, IDEOLOGY DISCONTENT, V18, P1, DOI DOI 10.1080/08913810608443650