Justifying deliberative democracy: Are two heads always wiser than one?

Contemporary Political Theory 10 (1):78-101 (2011)
Abstract
Democracy is usually justified either on intrinsic or instrumental, particularly epistemic, grounds. Intrinsic justifications stress the values inherent in the democratic process itself, whereas epistemic ones stress that it results in good outcomes. This article examines whether epistemic justifications for deliberative democracy are superior to intrinsic ones. The Condorcet jury theorem is the most common epistemic justification of democracy. I argue that it is not appropriate for deliberative democracy. Yet deliberative democrats often explicitly state that the process will favour the best argument. This can only be the case if deliberation improves the overall competence of the group and of the individuals that constitute it. I analyse when deliberation will increase competences and when it will not do so and find that individual competences will not reliably increase as a result of deliberation. In order for deliberative democracy to be epistemically more effective than representative democracy, strong procedural assumptions need to be made and deliberative democracy needs to be justified based on a combination of epistemic and intrinsic elements.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1057/cpt.2010.8
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 37,965
External links

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

Why Deliberative Democracy?Amy Gutmann & Dennis Thompson - 2004 - Princeton University Press.
Democracy and Disagreement.Amy Gutmann & Dennis Thompson - 1998 - Ethics 108 (3):607-610.
Deliberation Day.Bruce Ackerman & James S. Fishkin - 2002 - Journal of Political Philosophy 10 (2):129–152.
On Legitimacy and Political Deliberation.Bernard Manin - 1987 - Political Theory 15 (3):338-368.

View all 18 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Communicative Democracy: A Version of Deliberative Democracy.Adela Cortina - 2010 - Archiv für Rechts- Und Sozialphilosophie 96 (2):133-150.
Can Deliberative Democracy Be Partisan?Russell Muirhead - 2010 - Critical Review 22 (2-3):129-157.
The (Severe) Limits of Deliberative Democracy as the Basis for Political Choice.Gerald F. Gaus - 2008 - Theoria: A Journal of Social and Political Theory 55 (117):26-53.
Pictures of Politics: Deliberative and Other Aspects of Democracy.Bert van den Brink - 2012 - Archiv für Rechts- Und Sozialphilosophie 98 (3):396-410.
Liberal, Republican and Deliberative Democracy.Henning Ottmann - 2006 - Synthesis Philosophica 21 (2):315-325.
Deliberative Democracy and Political Ignorance.Ilya Somin - 2010 - Critical Review 22 (2-3):253-279.
On Deliberative Democracy.Christian F. Rostboll - 2001 - SATS: Northern European Journal of Philosophy 2 (2):166-181.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2016-02-04

Total views
14 ( #437,843 of 2,312,258 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #458,437 of 2,312,258 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Monthly downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature