scholarly journals The Role of Self-Interest in Deliberation: A Theory of Deliberative Capital

2021 ◽  
pp. 003232172098149
Author(s):  
Afsoun Afsahi
Keyword(s):  
Social Capital ◽  
Deliberative Democracy ◽  
Deliberative Process ◽  
Participant Engagement ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
Facilitation Techniques

How do successful deliberations unfold? What happens when they unravel? In this article, I propose that we think of the dynamics of participant engagement within deliberation as series of self-interested and reciprocal investments in and divestments from deliberative capital. This article has three parts. First, I draw on the literatures on deliberative democracy and social capital to outline a theory of deliberative capital. I highlight the important role self-interest plays in the process of those initial investments – instances of engagement in positive deliberative behaviours. Second, drawing from my experience as a facilitator, I give an account of the particular indicators of investments and divestments that we might expect to see in a given deliberative engagement. Third, I briefly outline two innovative facilitation techniques that can be utilized at the beginning or during a deliberative process that trigger self-interest, which incentivizes investments and discourages divestments.

The Place of Self-Interest and the Role of Power in Deliberative Democracy*

2010 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 64-100 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane Mansbridge ◽  
James Bohman ◽  
Simone Chambers ◽  
David Estlund ◽  
Andreas Føllesdal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Deliberative Democracy ◽  
Self Interest

scholarly journals University and deliberative democracy. Towards citizenship education

2016 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paolo Scotton
Keyword(s):  
Deliberative Democracy ◽  
Social Role ◽  
University Education ◽  
Political Life ◽  
Deliberative Process ◽  
Political Debates ◽  
Political Theories ◽  
Complete Rejection ◽  
High Standards

Deliberative democracy represents one of the most relevant political theories and it has acquired a growing importance within political debates and practices. However it presents some crucial problems in relation to the very high standards of rationality required to citizens for the deliberative process, in particular regarding the problem of public ignorance and the capabilities’ deficit. Amid these problems this article argues in favour of the necessity of education to political life as an unavoidable precondition for deliberative democracy. Since the theory is mainly concerned with the participation of adults within society, the task of offering possible solutions to these questions evidently stands on the shoulders of university education. The article calls for a fundamental ethical and social role of university within society without which the gap between the abstract theory of deliberative democracy and its real practices would determine its complete rejection and any form of democratic participation would ultimately be meaningless, if not dangerous.

scholarly journals Bleaching preferences: Why deliberative procedure should include self-interested preferences

2011 ◽  
Vol 22 (3) ◽  
pp. 71-93
Author(s):  
Ivan Mladenovic
Keyword(s):  
Deliberative Democracy ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Public Deliberation ◽  
Standard Account ◽  
The Common Good ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
Desirable Feature ◽  
Open Debate ◽  
The Common

Someone might vote for an option that on his or her view best promotes his or her self-interest. But, someone might vote for an option that promotes what he or she sees as a common good. The point is that there is no necessity here. Empirically oriented investigations showed that people vote both for self-centered and prosocial reasons. On the standard account of deliberative democracy public discussion is oriented towards achieving the common good. In this paper I shall argue that there is no necessity in supposing that public deliberation will lead to consensus over the common good. If consensus over the common good is neither realistic, nor desirable feature of public deliberation, then the most that practically oriented deliberative democrats might hope for is an open debate which may influence post-deliberative voting. Or so I shall argue. On this account, deliberative democracy makes more probable that outcome of the voting procedure will reflect concerns over the common good. According to this conception the appeal to selfinterest is not ex hypothesi excluded. The role of public deliberation is to bring to the fore both self-centered and prosocial concerns, and eventually to show why prosocial concerns should override private concerns. But there is no necessity here. The most important thing is to have sound procedure for weighting the reasons that speak both for and against self-interested concerns.

Interview with Jürgen Habermas

2018 ◽  
pp. 870-882
Author(s):  
Jürgen Habermas
Keyword(s):  
Democratic Process ◽  
Jürgen Habermas ◽  
Deliberative Process ◽  
Jurgen Habermas ◽  
Ideal Speech Situation ◽  
Self Interest ◽  
Speech Situation ◽  
The Ideal

This interview with Jürgen Habermas covers a number of crucial and hotly debated topics in deliberative democracy—such as the role of the ideal speech situation, the role of (rational) consensus, and the possibility of deliberation in the strategic realm of politics and in deeply divided societies. In addition, it sets outs his assessment of current developments in deliberative theory—such as the contribution of narratives, emotions and rhetorics to the deliberative process and the role of self-interest and bargaining in deliberation. Jürgen Habermas presents an integrative and optimistic vision of the deliberative program, stressing the importance of a systemic and long-term approach where the democratic process “as a whole is filtered through deliberation”.

Economic Significance of Social Capital

2011 ◽  
pp. 46-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Polishchuk ◽  
R. Menyashev
Keyword(s):  
Social Capital ◽  
Collective Action ◽  
Common Good ◽  
Economic Conditions ◽  
Formal Institutions ◽  
Transmission Channels ◽  
Economic Significance ◽  
Bonding And Bridging ◽  
The Impact

The paper deals with economics of social capital which is defined as the capacity of society for collective action in pursuit of common good. Particular attention is paid to the interaction between social capital and formal institutions, and the impact of social capital on government efficiency. Structure of social capital and the dichotomy between its bonding and bridging forms are analyzed. Social capital measurement, its economic payoff, and transmission channels between social capital and economic outcomes are discussed. In the concluding section of the paper we summarize the results of our analysis of the role of social capital in economic conditions and welfare of Russian cities.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document