Has the Deliberative Model of Democracy an epistemic value?

Roberto García

doi:10.15765/pnrm.v7i12.367

Autores/as

Roberto García Pontificia Universidad Javeriana

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15765/pnrm.v7i12.367

Resumen

Deliberative democracy is a normative ideal of democracy. This model is a proposal for the regeneration of the legitimacy of our institutions, but also a mechanism for decision making. It is based on two different dimensions: a procedural dimension where the model demands the inclusion and an equal capacity to influence the final decision of all those affected (Cohen, 1989; Bohman, 1996; Habermas, 1992 ...) and a substantive dimension where the political decisions are made through a collective procedure of argumentation and public discussion. If these conditions are recognized, the decisions will be more rational and better decisions. This paper has two aims. First I will present the key elements of this epistemic conception of political legitimacy. Second I will show the challenges it faces. On a one hand, the counterfactual of many of its postulates and on the other, the obvious problems of bias consensualist of this model.

Descargas

Biografía del autor/a

Roberto García, Pontificia Universidad Javeriana

Roberto García Alonso es doctor en Ciencias Políticas y de la Administración por la Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. Es miembro y webmaster del Centro de Teoría Política de la UAM (CTP) y miembro del Grupo de Investigación de Teoría Política de la UAM. Actualmente sedesempeña como profesor Asistente en el Departamento de Ciencia Política de la Pontificia Universidad Javeriana de Bogotá (Colombia). Trabaja en dos líneas de investigación. La primera sobre los fundamentos teórico-normativos de los modelos deliberativos de democracia. La segunda sobre la implementación de mecanismos de participación ciudadana y en particular de los problemas derivados de la implementación de espacios de participación ciudadana.

Referencias

Ash, S. E(1951) “Effects of Group Pressure on the Modification and Distorsion of Judgments” En Steere, H (ed.) Groups, Leadership and Men. Pittburgh: Carnegie.

Bohman, J. (1996). Public Deliberation. Pluralism, Complexity, and Democracy,

Cambridge: MIT Press.

Cohen, J. (1986) An Epistemic Conception of Democracy, Ethics, 97 (1): 26-38.

Cohen, J. (1989) The Economic Basis of Deliberative Democracy, Social Philosophy and Policy, 6, (2): 25-50.

Converse, P. (1964).“The Nature of the Beliefs Systems in Mass Publics”. En Apter D. Ideology and Discontent, New York: Free Press

Christiano, T. (1996) The Rule of the Many. Colorado: Westview Press.

Christiano, T. (1997) "The Significance of Public Deliberation". En Bohman, J. &Regh, W. Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Downs, A. (1957) An economic theory of democracy. Nueva York: Harper and Row.

Estlund, D (1993) "Who's Afraid of Deliberative Democracy? The Strategic/Deliberative Dichotomy in Recent Constitutional Jurisprudence," Texas Law Review: 1437-1477.

Estlund, D (1997) "Beyond Fairness and Deliberation: The Epistemic Dimension of Democratic Authority," En Bohman, J y Regh, W (1997) Deliberative Democracy, MIT Press,

Fishkin, J. &Laslett, R. (2003) Debating Deliberative Democracy. Oxford: Blackwell.

Gutmann, A. & Thompson, D. (1996) Democracy and Disagreement. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

Habermas, J (1984) Theory of Communicative Action: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Boston, BeaconPress.

-(1992) “Tres modelos de democracia sobre el concepto de una política deliberativa”, Debats, 39: 18-21.

- (1998). Facticidad y validez, Madrid: Trotta.

- (2000) Aclaraciones a la Ética del Discurso, Madrid: Trotta

- (2001) Teoría de la Acción Comunicativa: Complementos y Estudios Previos. Madrid: Cátedra.

- (2005) “Concluding Comments on Empirical Approaches to Deliberative Politics”, ActaPolítica, 40: 384-392.

Janis, I. (1972) Victims of Groupthink. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Knight, J. y Johnson.J (1994). «Aggregation and deliberation: On the possibility

of democratic legitimacy», Political Theory, 22, 2: 277-296.

Lupia, A (2002) Deliberation disconnected: What it takes to improve civic competence. En Law and Contemporary Problems. 65, 3: 133-150.

Manin, B. (1987). “On legitimacy and political deliberation”, Political Theory,15(3): 338-368.

Maldonado, M.A (2007) “La política en la teoría deliberativa. Notas sobre deliberación, decisión y conflicto”. Revista Española de CienciaPolítica, 16: 37-59.

Miller, D. (1992) “Deliberative Democracy and Social Choice, Political Studies, XL, Special Issue: 54-67.

Mouffe, Ch. (1993). The return of the political.Londres: Verso.

Muguerza, J (1989) “La alternativa del disenso.(En torno a la fundamentación ética de los derechos humanos)En Muguerza, J et al. El fundamento de los derechos humanos, edición preparada por Gregorio Peces Barba Martinez. Madrid: Debate.

- (1990). Desde la perplejidad (Ensayos sobre la ética, la razón y el diálogo).Madrid: Fondo de Cultura Económica

Neblo, M.A. (2005) “Thinking through Democracy: Between the Theory and Practice of Deliberative Politics”, ActaPolitica, 40: 169-181.

Perez Zafrilla, P.J. (2009) “Democracia deliberativa: una apuesta por el valor epistémico de la deliberación pública”. Revista de Filosofía, 34, 1: 155-173

Popkin. S. L. (1991).The Reasoning Voter: Communication and Persuasion in Presidential Campaigns. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Richardson, H. (2002). Democratic autonomy, Public reasoning about the ends of

policy, Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Rosenberg, S.W. (2002). The Not So Common Sense: Differences in the Way People Judge Social and Political Life. New Haven: Yale University Press.

- (2005). “The Empirical Study of Deliberative Democracy: Setting a Research Agenda”, ActaPolítica40: 212-224.

Shapiro, I. ( 2002). «Optimal Deliberation?», en J. Fishkin y P. Laslett, eds., Debating deliberative democracy, Journal of Political Philosophy, special number 10,2: 196-211.

Sniderman, P. M., Brody, R.A. y Tetlock P. et al. (1991). Reasoning and choice.Explorations in political psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,

Sunstein, C (2002). «The law of group polarization». En The Journal of Political Philosophy, special number, 10, 2: 175-195

Vallespin, F (2001) “Teoría del discurso y acción comunicativa en JürgenHabermas”. En Máiz, R (ed.) Teorías Políticas Contemporáneas. Valencia: Tirant lo Blanch.

Wilson, R.W. (1992). Compliance Ideologies: Rethinking Political Culture. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Zaller, J. R. (1992). The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion.Cambridge: Cambridge UniversityPress.