Rational Choice And Democratic Deliberation

This book offers a comprehensive and sustained critique of theories of deliberative democracy.

One of the most remarkable developments in the last twenty years has been the revival of the idea of deliberative democracy. Set against aggregative models of democracy derived from economics, such as the theory of rational choice, the idea of deliberative democracy, or decision-making based on public deliberations among free and equal citizens, represents a highly significant development in democratic theory. Exploring this development, this book provides a fresh and original perspective on a theme at the center of current debates in democratic theory and practice. The essays collected in this volume offer a series of powerful arguments in support of the view that fair and equal treatment of groups is best defended on the basis of a theory of public deliberation. Such a theory has both a normative and institutional dimension. It provides a framework for the normative justification of state policies toward socially or culturally disadvantaged groups, and suggests several institutional mechanisms, such as deliberative forums and citizen's juries, where the voices of disadvantaged groups can be articulated under fair conditions and become effective in shaping' public policy. Democracy as Public Deliberation reminds us that the issue of democracy is not simply one of top-down management and control, but bottom-up considerations that are often located in ethnic, religious and linguistic groups. The great virtue of this volume is to identify statist systems that claim to be democratic, but only in terms of the dominant culture. Democracy as Public Deliberation indicates that democracy often comes in small packages--and in that very fact, it tests the actual ambitions and standards of the macro-state. This is an especially powerful volume for those interested in the strengths and weaknesses of third world structures.

Deliberation and Decision explores ways of bridging the gap between two rival approaches to theorizing about democratic institutions: constitutional economics on the one hand and deliberative democracy on the other. The two approaches offer very different accounts of the functioning and legitimacy of democratic institutions. Although both highlight the importance of democratic consent, their accounts of such consent could hardly be more different. Constitutional economics models individuals as self-interested rational utility maximizers and uses economic efficiency criteria such as incentive compatibility for evaluating institutions. Deliberative democracy models individuals as communicating subjects capable of engaging in democratic discourse. The two approaches are disjointed not only in terms of their assumptions and methodology but also in terms of the communication - or lack thereof - between their respective communities of researchers. This book provides a comprehensive overview of the recent debate between the two approaches and makes new and original contributions to that debate.

One of the most remarkable developments in the last twenty years has been the revival of the idea of deliberative democracy. Set against aggregative models of democracy derived from economics, such as the theory of rational choice, the idea of deliberative democracy, or decision-making based on public deliberations among free and equal citizens, represents a highly significant development in democratic theory. Exploring this development, this book provides a fresh and original perspective on a theme at the center of current debates in democratic theory and practice. The essays collected in this volume offer a series of powerful arguments in support of the view that fair and equal treatment of groups is best defended on the basis of a theory of public deliberation. Such a theory has both a normative and institutional dimension. It provides a framework for the normative justification of state policies toward socially or culturally disadvantaged groups, and suggests several institutional mechanisms, such as deliberative forums and citizen's juries, where the voices of disadvantaged groups can be articulated under fair conditions and become effective in shaping' public policy. Democracy as Public Deliberation reminds us that the issue of democracy is not simply one of top-down management and control, but bottom-up considerations that are often located in ethnic, religious and linguistic groups. The great virtue of this volume is to identify statist systems that claim to be democratic, but only in terms of the dominant culture. Democracy as Public Deliberation indicates that democracy often comes in small packages--and in that very fact, it tests the actual ambitions and standards of the macro-state. This is an especially powerful volume for those interested in the strengths and weaknesses of third world structures. Maurizio Passerin d'Entrves is a senior lecturer in political theory at the University of Manchester. He is the author of Modernity, Justice and Community (1990) and of The Political Philosophy of Hannah Arendt (1994). He is the co-editor of Habermas and the Unfinished Project of Modernity (1996) and of Public and Private: Legal, Political and Philosophical Perspectives (2000). He is also the editor of Democracy as Public Deliberation: New Perspectives (2002).

This volume assesses the strengths and weaknesses of deliberative democracy.

This descriptive more than prescriptive journey begins with an Anglo-North American overview of the democratic terrain and then zooms in on specific democratic landscapes: liberal, classic pluralism, catallaxy (exchange economics applied to political science), participatory democracy, democratic pragmatism, deliberative democracy, and radical pluralism. Democracy's place within a globalizing world occupies the last chapter. Cunningham (philosophy, U. of Toronto) admits he leans toward democratic pragmatism as espoused in John Dewey's The Public and Its Problems (1927). Suitable for an introductory university course. Distributed by Taylor & Francis. Annotation copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR

Rational Choice defines 'rationality' as a complete and transitive hierarchical ordering of preferences for individuals. Public Choice applies this economic rationality to voting and politics. But the deliberative democracy of Rawls and Habermas is not a market good. It is concerned with the debate leading up to a decision in the market or in politics, which can inspire us to redefine the common goods that shape our lives, perhaps reprioritizing our preferences. But Rawls and Habermas think there are no moral facts until constructed by their procedure of deliberation. So as an alternative, I look at the syncretic epistemology of virtue realism as a remedy for analyzing and dealing with today's culture war of misinformation.