Making a case for stricter abortion laws
In: Palgrave pivot
18 results
Sort by:
In: Palgrave pivot
In: Journal of military ethics, Volume 10, Issue 3, p. 160-173
ISSN: 1502-7589
In: Göteborg studies in politics 107
In: International politics: a journal of transnational issues and global problems, Volume 53, Issue 2, p. 277-283
ISSN: 1740-3898
In: International politics, Volume 53, Issue 2, p. 277-283
ISSN: 1384-5748
World Affairs Online
In: International politics, Volume 50, Issue 4, p. 600-622
ISSN: 1384-5748
World Affairs Online
In: Journal of international relations and development: JIRD, official journal of the Central and East European International Studies Association, Volume 16, Issue 1, p. [138]-166
ISSN: 1408-6980
World Affairs Online
In: International politics: a journal of transnational issues and global problems, Volume 50, Issue 4, p. 600-622
ISSN: 1740-3898
SSRN
Working paper
In: Social epistemology: a journal of knowledge, culture and policy, Volume 31, Issue 3, p. 251-265
ISSN: 1464-5297
SSRN
Working paper
In: Political studies: the journal of the Political Studies Association of the United Kingdom, Volume 62, Issue 1_suppl, p. 99-116
ISSN: 1467-9248
This article explores a tension in deliberative democratic theory. The tension consists in that deliberative opinion formation ideally aims to reach consensus, while a consensus, once established, will likely impede the conditions for further rational public discourse. Hence, over time, deliberative democracy might risk undermining itself. While the tension is demonstrable in theory, we also suggest three cognitive and socio-psychological mechanisms by which consensus might hamper the rationality of public discourse: after an agreement, participants cease to develop new arguments, they tend to forget existing arguments and their fear of deviating from the social norm promotes conformism. Existing research has largely neglected to study how consensus in decision making affects future public deliberation. Our article thus serves three purposes: to elaborate the consensus paradox in deliberative democratic theory; to open up a research agenda for examining the paradox empirically; and to assess the theoretical implications of the paradox.
In: Political studies: the journal of the Political Studies Association of the United Kingdom, Volume 62, Issue S1, p. 99-116
ISSN: 1467-9248
This article explores a tension in deliberative democratic theory. The tension consists in that deliberative opinion formation ideally aims to reach consensus, while a consensus, once established, will likely impede the conditions for further rational public discourse. Hence, over time, deliberative democracy might risk undermining itself. While the tension is demonstrable in theory, we also suggest three cognitive and socio-psychological mechanisms by which consensus might hamper the rationality of public discourse: after an agreement, participants cease to develop new arguments, they tend to forget existing arguments and their fear of deviating from the social norm promotes conformism. Existing research has largely neglected to study how consensus in decision making affects future public deliberation. Our article thus serves three purposes: to elaborate the consensus paradox in deliberative democratic theory; to open up a research agenda for examining the paradox empirically; and to assess the theoretical implications of the paradox. Adapted from the source document.
In: Political Studies, 62:S1, April 2014
SSRN
In: Political Studies, 62:S1, April 2014
SSRN