The Origins of the Deliberative Turn

Abstract

This chapter deals with the origins and the building-process of the theoretical field of deliberative democracy (which took place over a very specific period between 1980 and 1993). This history was far from linear: Deliberative Democracy came out of a complex process in which different conceptual elements were gradually elaborated, changed and reworked. The theoretical field was built through several independent approaches. We can pinpoint five different stages: a phase of transition and theoretical innovation compared to the models of participatory democracy that characterized the sixties and seventies; the first formulations and insights, in the early eighties; the constituent phase proper in the late eighties; the phase of articulation of a deliberative field and its overlapping with other intellectual traditions; and finally the consolidation of the philosophical foundations of deliberative democracy, mainly thanks to Jürgen Habermas and John Rawls, with their works of the early nineties.

Religious Interactions in Deliberative Democratic Systems Theory

“…Instead, he seems to be arguing that "there is something out of whack in the unacknowledged motives" of certain religious claims (Stout 2010b, p. 529). Here, Stout reiterates his overall point, which is that Rorty's fixation on religion distracts 4 For a more comprehensive history of deliberative democracy, see Antonio Floridia's "The Origins of the Deliberative Turn" (Floridia 2018). He cites both Habermas and John Rawls as the "consolidation of philosophical foundations" in the 1990s, which is the focus of this essay (Floridia 2018, p. 36).…”

Deliberative Democracy in the Age of Social Media | Democracia deliberativa na Era das Redes Sociais

“…In order to prevent people from misjudgements and misleading decisions, deliberation, as the third democratic premise, functions as a corrective. According to deliberative theorist, "democratic legitimacy is not only a result of correct electoral procedures but also discursively constructed, in a public dimension, by deliberation that was the more democratic the more inclusive and egalitarian it became" 26 . Deliberation is as an exchange of reasoned argument to produce a rational, inclusive, respectful discussion and gain the best possible overall political outcomes for the common good 27 .…”

“…Political dialogue is context-dependent and depends on public spaces and an infrastructure that provide the right condition for the formation of the public will. The extent and quality of deliberation is linked to its environment 31 . Therefore, unconstrained communication and the education and inclusion of responsible citizens are necessary pre-conditions for the realisation of the common good 32 .…”

Tan, M; (2021) Evaluating Deliberative Democratic Designs: Theory of Change and Citizens' Assembly Pilot in Lebanon

“…Some interpretation of the document viewed it as a constraint against far-reaching democratic ambition. At the same time, Bessette adhered to a Madisonian view of the constitution that produced inspiration for further development in deliberative democracy (Floridia, 2018). Madison's view that fair and reasonable voices on public good could be achieved through a body of chosen citizens, whose wisdom and patriotism through deliberation would help the assembly make selfless decisions that are better for the public in the long term.…”

“…Such inquiry sets the stage for modern deliberative democratic theory's investigation into the precondition for good quality deliberation and decision (Bessette, 1980). Bessette's papers also feed into the debate of how interests would impact deliberation and whether a common good is achievable with deliberation (Floridia, 2018). Through Sunstein's works, further inquiry focused on how interest groups and individual interests could impact democratic politics.…”