Suchergebnisse

It is sometimes assumed that voting is the central mechanism for political decision-making. The contributors to this volume focus on an alternative mechanism, that is decision by discussion or deliberation. The original contributions include case studies based on historical and current instances of deliberative democracy, normative discussion of the merits of deliberation compared to other models of collective decision-making, and studies of the conditions under which it tends to improve the quality of decisions. This volume is characterized by a realistic approach to the issue of deliberative democracy. Rather than assuming that deliberative democracy is always ideal, the authors critically probe its limits and weaknesses as well as its strengths

Deliberative democracy is a growing branch of democratic theory. It suggests understanding and assessing democracy in terms of the quality of communication among citizens, politicians, as well as between citizens and politicians. In this interview, drawing on his extensive research on deliberative practice within and beyond parliaments, André Bächtiger reflects on the development of the field over the last two decades, the relationship between normative theory and empirical research, and the prospects for practicing deliberation in populist times.

Bächtiger, A.; Steenbergen, M. R.; Niemeyer, S.: Deliberative democracy: an introduction. - S. 485-496 Niemeyer, S.; Dryzek, J. S.: The ends of deliberation: meta-consensus and inter-subjective rationality as ideal outcomes. - S. 497-526 Neblo, M. A.: Family disputes: diversity in defining and measuring deliberation. - S. 527-557 Naurin, D.: Why give reason? Measuring arguing and bargaining in survey research. - S. 559-575 Bara, J.; Weale, A.; Biquelet, A.: Analysing parliamentary debate with computer assistance. - S. 577-605 Hangartner, D.; Bächtiger, A.; Grünenfelder, R.; Steenbergen, M. R.: Mixing Habermas with Bayes: methodological and theoretical advances in the study of deliberation. - S. 607-644 Karpowitz, C. F.; Mendelberg, T.: Groups and deliberation. - S. 645-662 Wesołowska, E.: Social processes of antagonism and synergy in deliberating groups. - S. 663-680

Conceptions fo the good: challenging the premises of deliberative democracy / Micheline Milot -- Religious belief, religious schooling, and the demands of reciprocity / Harry Brighouse -- Religious education and democratic character / Paul Weithman -- Open versus closed constitutional negotiation / Simone Chambers -- Is democracy a means to global justice? / James Bohman -- Deliberative democracy and the politics of reconciliation / Duncan Ivison -- Resisting culutre: Seyla Benhabib's deliberative approach to the politics of recognition in colonial contexts / Glen Coulthard -- The implications of incommensureability for deliberative democracy / Jorge M. Valadex -- Public opinion and popular will / Henry S. Richardson -- Consulting the public thoughtfully: prospects for deliberative democracy / James Fishkin -- The micropolitics of deliberation: beyond argumentation to recognition and justice / John Forester and David Kahane

Democracy in Indonesia is often carried out with the word "election". But democracy is not just the word "election", democracy has wide and many phenomena and reviews these phenomena are important. One of them is deliberative democracy. Many scientists have reviewed this idea. Both from the forum, both from the process, both from the of participants, both from the ideas themselves in Indonesia. Even though deliberative democracy has other elements. One of them is learning. It's very rare to hear the idea of learning in deliberative democracy itself. Rarely describe what learning is and why it is important. And it turns out learning has an important role in supporting the deliberate process in the public sphere / public space

Fairfield reviews 'The Inclusion of the Other: Studies in Political Theory' by Jurgen Habermas.

Introduction -- Method and Procedures: The Practical D -- Deliberative Polling": A Practicable Method -- Multiple Deliberative Democracy: Procedures for Chinese Structure -- The Operational Space for Multiple Deliberative Democratic Approaches -- Comparison among Political Participation Methods: Diversity in China's Practices of Deliberative Democracy -- Adequate Communication: Make an Informed.

Typically a field for political theorists, deliberative democracy is becoming more empirical using a diverse array of methodologies for investigation of a variety of real-world settings. Yet moving forward, this field faces the three distinct challenges of booming diversity in conceptualizing deliberation, appropriate methodological tools, & development of a more unified & analytical framework. The standard conception has a strong Habermasian orientation, while more recent conceptions are closely linked to criticism of Habermasian discourse models as being impossible to achieve in the real world & having undesirable & potentially exclusionary side-effects due to its strong focus on rational discourse & consensus. Even as new directions are welcomed in empirical research, growing diversity raises issues of theoretical coherence in deliberative theory, & empirical contributions have been unable to draw a clear line between true deliberative & strategic action despite increasing methodological sophistication. Although computer assisted textual analysis can speed up data collection, empirical analyses remain time consuming & applying multilevel statistical models creates serious issues. A more unified analytical framework that enriches institutional approaches with individual-level characteristics & psychologically relevant factors would also lead to a fuller understanding of deliberative processes. References. L. Reed