Learning to Deliberate

Abstract

One argument for deliberative democracy is that public deliberation enhances a sincere concern for the common good. Most of the theories of deliberative democracy fail to give a satisfying account of this process. One of the causes for this state of affairs is a preoccupation with autonomy, which tends to obscure that public deliberation is deliberation with others who are actually present. On such an interpretation of publicity, shame, or a concern for reputation, plays a crucial motivational role. Aristotle, by acknowledging this role, is capable of constructing an account of the formation of deliberative character that is far more realistic than the standard answer of deliberative democrats. In particular, it is shown that public deliberation cannot discharge its edifying or civilizing function all by itself. To have the desired effect, the development of the deliberative capacity requires the acquisition of the virtues of character, especially that of truthfulness.

Agree on How to Disagree: Aristotelian Ethics and Conversational Virtue

“…Self-presentation is important because conversation serves to convey to others who we are as an individual. As Nieuwenburg (2004) argues, the virtue of truthfulness forces us to become self-reflective about our own moral capacities, preventing us from becoming pretenders in an unconscious way. Political communities need citizens to be moral actors, and part of that morality requires presenting themselves and their ideas to the public for judgment, without tricking the public.…”