Abstract
The empirical turn in the study of deliberative democracy raises a problem: deliberative democracy’s conceptual premises are in tension with those of the social scientific approaches often used to study it. If deliberation is to function as a source of political legitimacy, we must treat citizens as intentional agents capable of reasoning. In contrast, modernist social science characteristically employs forms of explanation that bypass intentionality. Deliberative democrats thus risk theoretical inconsistency when they attempt to study deliberation using the techniques of modernist social science. The danger is that when deliberative democrats rely on modernist social science, they at least implicitly reinforce a fallacious belief in expertise at the expense of a more dialogic and democratic ethos.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Number of pages | 18 |
Journal | Political Studies |
Early online date | 8 Jul 2022 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 2022 |
JEL classifications
- d72 - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior