8 found
Order:
See also
  1.  33
    Justifying Deliberative Democracy: Are Two Heads Always Wiser Than One?Zsuzsanna Chappell - 2011 - Contemporary Political Theory 10 (1):78-101.
    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 (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  2.  4
    Deliberative Democracy: A Critical Introduction.Zsuzsanna Chappell - 2012 - New York, NY, USA: Palgrave.
    In spite of the global diffusion of democracy and a general commitment to democratic values, there is a widespread alienation from the political process in advanced democracies. Deliberative democracy has received much attention in recent years as a possible solution to this malaise. Its promise of a more engaged and collective form of politics has drawn the interest of policy makers and political philosophers – generating new avenues of thought in contemporary democratic theory as well as heated debates about its (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  3.  52
    Justifying Deliberative Democracy: Are Two Heads Always Wiser Than One|[Quest]|.Zsuzsanna Chappell - 2011 - Contemporary Political Theory 10 (1):78.
    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 (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   3 citations  
  4.  4
    The Enacted Ethics of Self-injury.Zsuzsanna Chappell - 2022 - Topoi 41 (2):383-394.
    Enactivism has much to offer to moral, social and political philosophy through giving a new perspective on existing ethical problems and improving our understanding of morally ambiguous behaviours. I illustrate this through the case of self-injury, a common problematic behaviour which has so far received little philosophical attention. My aim in this paper has been to use ideas from enactivism in order to explore self-injury without assuming a priori that it is morally or socially wrong under all circumstances, seeking to (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  5.  81
    Rational Choice and Democratic Deliberation: A Theory of Discourse Failure, by Guido Pincione and Fernando R. Tesón, 2006, XI + 258 Pages. [REVIEW]Zsuzsanna Chappell - 2008 - Economics and Philosophy 24 (1):105-111.
  6. Formal and Informal Models of Deliberative Democracy: A Tension in the Theory of Political Deliberation.Zsuzsanna Chappell - 2010 - Representation 3 (46):295-308.
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  7.  2
    Review of Rational Choice and Democratic Deliberation: A Theory of Discourse Failure. [REVIEW]Zsuzsanna Chappell - 2008 - Economics and Philosophy 24 (1):105-111.
  8.  1
    No Title Available: Reviews.Zsuzsanna Chappell - 2008 - Economics and Philosophy 24 (1):105-111.