tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post116787995143097294..comments2023-10-29T10:32:36.914-04:00Comments on Philosophy, et cetera: Deliberative Benefits and ChallengesRichard Y Chappellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16725218276285291235noreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1168739639568587662007-01-13T20:53:00.000-05:002007-01-13T20:53:00.000-05:00[I just fell across this comment, which was appare...[I just fell across <A HREF="http://www.cocomment.com/comment/5832380" REL="nofollow">this comment</A>, which was apparently meant to be posted here...]<BR/><BR/>Hi Richard, I'd add that one of the limits to deliberative effectiveness is the process design. I'm not talking about an online forum sponsored by a government agency masquerading as deliberative democracy. No, I'm talking about formal processes like citizens' assemblies, World Cafe, etc which are facilitated to "draw out" the deliberation from its participants. In my opinion, the legitimacy of many of these events is compromised by a learning phase which is instructivist rather than constructivist in nature, which has the potential to bias the outcome.<BR/><BR/>ps. found you through a live Technorati search feed.<BR/><BR/>- <A HREF="http://members.optusnet.com.au/rlubensky/" REL="nofollow">Ron Lubensky</A>Richard Y Chappellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16725218276285291235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1168188240907237332007-01-07T11:44:00.000-05:002007-01-07T11:44:00.000-05:00Richard,Notice your shift from "There are intrinsi...Richard,<BR/><BR/>Notice your shift from "There are intrinsic motivations here" to "... people can be intrinsically motivated ..." Most people, so far as I can observe, are motivated to hold opinions that they enjoy holding, rather than to pursue truth.<BR/><BR/>I wasn't trying to justify anarchy here, just asking what purpose you think government (specifically, the power to coerce people into funding stuff) should have if you believe people are willing to provide public goods on their own.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1168155879731396602007-01-07T02:44:00.000-05:002007-01-07T02:44:00.000-05:00I was simply pointing out that people can be intri...I was simply pointing out that people can be intrinsically motivated to pursue truth and the common good. There is nobility in the human condition. Granted, we have all sorts of more self-interested motivations <I>in addition</I>. But most people have a streak of idealism in them that can be teased out. At least, most people are happy enough to participate in a jury -- apparently deliberating together in good faith, no matter your cynicism. <BR/><BR/>(I'm not sure how any of that is supposed to justify anarchy...? We're not <I>always</I> angels, after all.)Richard Y Chappellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16725218276285291235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1168152055747399612007-01-07T01:40:00.000-05:002007-01-07T01:40:00.000-05:00Richard,What intrinsic motivations are you speakin...Richard,<BR/><BR/>What intrinsic motivations are you speaking of? Are you saying that people will voluntarily provide public goods? That's fine, but if so, what purpose does government serve?<BR/><BR/>Or are you saying that people are motivated to involve themselves in democracy? Certainly they are, as most people like controlling how others must live, but how is that a good thing?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1167935925492375102007-01-04T13:38:00.000-05:002007-01-04T13:38:00.000-05:00Still, there may be a reporting bias in such thing...Still, there may be a reporting bias in such things. Afterall who would go to the trouble of arranging deliberation and then report it's failure?<BR/><BR/>But I also agree there is probably a latent desire for deliberation out there.<BR/><BR/>GNZAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1167904376125441382007-01-04T04:52:00.000-05:002007-01-04T04:52:00.000-05:00There are intrinsic motivations in play here that ...There are intrinsic motivations in play here that cast doubt on such economic analyses. (Blogs are public goods too, in that sense, and they seem to flourish just fine.)<BR/><BR/>The problem may be heightened for more demanding forms of deliberation (e.g. that take up whole working days). Citizens' Jury participants, for example, should be granted a compensatory wage for their time. But this isn't expected to be the primary motivator for participants.<BR/><BR/>It's worth nothing that in the real world cases to date, the randomly selected individuals are usually quite happy to participate in such deliberative forums. And they tend to be even <I>more</I> positive about it afterwards, as many find it to be an extremely rewarding experience. (See, for example, the <A HREF="http://www.jefferson-center.org/index.asp?Type=B_BASIC&SEC=%7B29D69C97-B5DE-43F1-AA92-E17B572E0070%7D" REL="nofollow">Jefferson Centre</A>'s account of a Citizens' Jury in Australia (2005), which positively assessed the potential for more deliberative community engagement of this sort [<A HREF="http://www.jefferson-center.org/vertical/Sites/%7BC73573A1-16DF-4030-99A5-8FCCA2F0BFED%7D/uploads/%7B6E964D77-7CD9-4BE8-A257-99CD115FB5A1%7D.PDF" REL="nofollow">PDF</A>].Richard Y Chappellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16725218276285291235noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6642011.post-1167888141090566282007-01-04T00:22:00.000-05:002007-01-04T00:22:00.000-05:00The type of participation that deliberative democr...The type of participation that deliberative democracy requires seems to be a public good in the economic sense of that term. The implication, if the theory of public goods is correct, is that people won't provide that type of participation. Of course if the theory of public goods is incorrect, it's hard to see why there should be any sort of political system at all.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com