本文從理論的基礎出發，試圖要反駁當下審議民主實踐，忽略了審議民主所「應該」強調的，並不是將審議民主視為是取得決策的一種工具或方法，而是必須將審議民主視為是一套有別於自由民主的思想。審議民主「應該」關注的，不是決策的正當性，而是如何深化民主。為此，本文回頭去找尋審議民主被提出的起點，並重新描繪審議民主轉向的核心價值是深化民主，而不是作出決策。這迫使理論必須從重新思考，如何從藉由「審議」取得決策正當性，往深化民主的方向移動，而且也同時讓審議民主理論所觸及的範圍，從「審議」形式的決策本身，擴及到一個完整不間斷的民主過程。 　　一旦確認審議民主是「深化民主」的「過程」，那麼充當實踐的配套措施（即本文所稱的「中介畛域」的適當運作），也應該由此理論基礎所引導。為此，本文從深化民主過程所需的理論概念中，推導出可進一步落實中介畛域的實踐要件，分別是開放性、連貫性、互為主體性和累積性。另一方面，為了防堵民主實踐上可能出現的困境，所以也針對「網路的巴爾幹化」、「論述失敗」與「易受主流意識操弄」三個困境，提出相對應的「有效性」、「簡易性」及「動態的脈絡化」三個要件。事實上，本文所提的七個要件，「共同」構成了本文所理解的審議民主在實踐時，其「理論」面向上所應具備的內涵，這些內涵非專屬於本文所檢視的辯論百科，而是適用於各種形式的審議民主程序。 　　最後，本文更進一步將上述七個要件細分成十四個細項。這十四個細項是試圖對應理論所指引的七個要件，並進而回應理論上所要求的「深化民主過程」的核心價值。或者說，這些細項可被當成是審議民主實踐機制設置上的最基本要求，雖然確保這十四個細項的審議民主實踐機制，無法保證最後的結果一定能達到理想境界，但我們至少可以相信，依循這些細項的機制，是試圖往深化民主──而不是取得決策正當性──的方向前進。當然，這十四個細項不是為了窮盡可能性或成為標準答案，而是在筆者能力範圍內所能提出的具體檢視方式，而提出這些具體的檢視方式，也分別有著實踐與理論上的各別意涵。 　　在實踐上，這十四個細項的提出是為了要指出，審議民主「理論」不應該一直停留在理論的層次，我們探索審議民主理論的最終目的之一，就是要實踐它，因此，從實踐層次來進行探究，並指出可能的實踐方式確有其必要性。另一方面，從理論上來看，本文所提的檢視細項不僅是為了要提供未來研究參考，更重要的是，這種實踐層次的闡明是為了凸顯出，未來的審議民主理論必須在理論與實踐之間找到明確的連結。換言之，應如何在實務的層次上施作審議民主是重要的，讓施作結果得以對理論進行回饋與修正也是重要的，但唯有理論與實踐之間能夠不斷地互相進行補充、修正，審議民主理論才有可能為民主作出真正貢獻，而本文正是試圖經由審議民主，與已被實作的辯論百科，為這種連結作出描繪。 / This paper tries to illustrate that deliberative democracy is not a decision-making method but a kind of thoughts. The core element of deliberative democracy is not about the legitimacy of policies but the process of deepening democracy. It means that deliberative democracy theory should widen its possible contribution from only a decision-making method to a complete process of deepening democracy. When we regard deliberative democracy as a process, then we should develop accompanying measures (so-called “intermediate realm” in this paper) for the real-life practice. For achieving this purpose, this paper infers four elements, that is, openness, coherence, inter-subjectiveness and cumulativeness, from theoretical foundations on the one side. For avoiding three another predicaments of democratic practice, that is , cyberbalkanization, discourse failure and the dominating ideology, this paper also proposes three accompanying elements, that is, effectiveness, simpleness and dynamic contextualization on the other hand. All these seven elements, applying to all kinds of deliberative democracy practice apart from Debatepedia which we take as an example in this paper, constitute the content of intermediate realm for deliberative democracy practice. This paper in a further step divides these seven elements into fourteen items in order to respond to the core value of deliberative democracy, i.e. deepening democracy. In other words, these items are the basic requirement for real-life deliberative democracy practice. These fourteen items have no intention to include all possibilities of democratic practice but merely to provide some concrete examination methods in my sphere. These examination methods have their practical and theoretical meaning at the same time. In practice, these fourteen items means deliberative democracy theory should not stay as a theory is. If democracy theory is an ideal for our better life, we then should realize it and, that is more important, develop some methods to realize it. In terms of theory, this paper reveals the close relationship between deliberative democracy theory and its practice. That means it is important to know how to realize deliberative democracy, it is also important to know how to improve democracy theory. But these two situations can only be done when we can find a valid connection between them. This paper takes Debatepedia as an example to describe how this kind of connection could be possible.