David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy and Social Criticism 27 (4):21-39 (2001)
The internet could be an efficient political instrument if it were seen as part of a democracy where free and open discourse within a vital public sphere plays a decisive role. The model of deliberative democracy, as developed by Jürgen Habermas and Seyla Benhabib, serves this concept of democracy best. The paper explores first the model of deliberative democracy as a ‘two-track model’ in which representative democracy is backed by the public sphere and a developing civil society. Secondly, it outlines the normative concept of the public sphere and its basic ideas, namely the uncoerced communication of equal participants with equal access and equal rights to intervene or propose themes. The third part for discussion shows how the internet could fit into this concept of public sphere and influence the quality of political debates, and emphasizes the important role it can play in the political process
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Brooke A. Ackerly (2006). Deliberative Democratic Theory for Building Global Civil Society: Designing a Virtual Community of Activists. Contemporary Political Theory 5 (2):113-141.
Mark D. West (2013). Is the Internet an Emergent Public Sphere? Journal of Mass Media Ethics 28 (3):155-159.
Sue Thomas (2004). Reconfiguring the Public Sphere: Implications for Analyses of Educational Policy. British Journal of Educational Studies 52 (3):228 - 248.
Sue Thomas (2004). Reconfiguring the Public Sphere: Implications for Analyses of Educational Policy. British Journal of Educational Studies 52 (3):228-248.
Similar books and articles
John S. Brady (2004). No Contest? Assessing the Agonistic Critiques of Jürgen Habermas’s Theory of the Public Sphere. Philosophy and Social Criticism 30 (3):331-354.
Noëlle McAfee (2008). Democracy and the Political Unconscious. Columbia University Press.
Robert B. Talisse (2004). Does Public Ignorance Defeat Deliberative Democracy? Critical Review 16 (4):455-463.
Cui Zhang (2008). Setting up a new model of the democratic theory ‐ research on Habermas' theory of public sphere. Proceedings of the Xxii World Congress of Philosophy 50:1095-1103.
Robert B. Talisse (2005). Deliberativist Responses to Activist Challenges: A Continuation of Young’s Dialectic. Philosophy and Social Criticism 31 (4):423-444.
John S. Dryzek (2005). Deliberative Democracy in Divided Societies: Alternatives to Agonism and Analgesia. Political Theory 33 (2):218 - 242.
Ian O'Flynn (2010). Deliberating About the Public Interest. Res Publica 16 (3):299-315.
Joshua Cohen (2009). Philosophy, Politics, Democracy: Selected Essays. Harvard University Press.
William Smith (2004). Democracy, Deliberation and Disobedience. Res Publica 10 (4):353-377.
Mason Richey (2012). Motivated Reasoning in Political Information Processing: The Death Knell of Deliberative Democracy? Philosophy of the Social Sciences 42 (4):511-542.
M. Richey (2012). Motivated Reasoning in Political Information Processing: The Death Knell of Deliberative Democracy? Philosophy of the Social Sciences 42 (4):511-542.
Paul Nieuwenburg (2004). Learning to Deliberate: Aristotle on Truthfulness and Public Deliberation. Political Theory 32 (4):449-467.
Added to index2010-09-14
Total downloads23 ( #164,443 of 1,862,234 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #346,256 of 1,862,234 )
How can I increase my downloads?