The objective for this study is to examine whether it is possible to use the method of reflective equilibrium in order to enhance the usefulness of public debates as a support for political decision-making. Since public debates from political quarters are seen as an important tool for policy-making, the need for a rational assessment of the views put forward in such debates are important. And since reflective equilibrium aims for coherence between judgments on different levels – intuitions, principles and theories, which all are put forward in public debates – the point of departure for this theses is that this method could be useful for the matter of bringing some kind of structure to public debates. The analysis in this study shows that there actually are similarities between the method of reflective equilibrium and the course of public debates, since they both are characterized by the fact that viewpoints are mutually scrutinized in the light of one another. Further, it is argued that a more systematic applying of the method of reflective equilibrium would further the justification force of the outcome of public debates, since the method stresses the need of rationality and the importance of taking all relevant opinions into consideration. Therefore, the conclusion is that applying reflective equilibrium to public debates could make the political decision-making more democratic.

Deliberative democrats have argued that democracy requires citizens to seek consensus, using a familiar style of principle-based moral argument. However, critics like Iris Young object that deliberative democracy’s favoured model of reasoning is inadequate for resolving deep value conflicts. She and others have suggested that the aim of improving understanding across political differences could be achieved if our conception of legitimate democratic discourse were broadened to include a significant role for narrative. The question is whether such a revision would amount to abandoning the deliberative democratic goal of seeking reasonable resolutions of value conflict. This thesis argues that a narrative approach to deliberative democracy can realize its commitment to reasoned justification, while preserving the significance of differing perspectives and promoting mutual understanding. The narrative-contextualist approach is developed and illustrated with reference to public debate over issues such as cultural accommodation and historical justice.

Abstract Title: A democratic organisation - one click away? A quantitative content analysis which studies the potential of democratic communication through intranet use. Authors: Stina Gabrielsson and Jill Johansson Vennelin Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate whether there is potential for democratic communication within the NGOs through intranet use. Key questions to be answered were: To what extent is authority versus members represented on the intranet Klick’s discussion forum? What/which communication-related functions out of social function, knowledge transferring and debate are featured in the posts published on the intranet Klick’s discussion forum? Are deliberative discussions being practiced in the discussion forumthreads on the intranet Klick? The thesis is based on the theory of deliberative democracy. In order to substantiate the theory has theoretical perspectives concerning participation and involvement also been applied. These perspectives are derived from organizational theory and internal communication. Method/Material: This study consists of a quantitative content analysis of the 477 posts and the 129 discussion threads available on the NGO RFSU’s intranet Klick the 29th of november 2012. Main results: The results show that 63, 4 percent of those who were active in the discussionforum represented the category authority, while the category members were formed by 36, 6 percent. The result of the communicational functions of the forum’s posts were 75, 7 percent knowledge transferring, 33, 3 percent debate and 23, 3 percent social function. 86, 6 percent of the discussion threads were considered neutral, 13, 2 percent deliberative and no, 0 percent, were considered non-deliberative. The study has found many examples of the presence of democratic communication within Klick, showing that this is possible through intranet use. However, the low participation in terms of members as a whole and the over-representation of authorities can be argued to not form democratic communication with reference to the chosen definition of democracy, the model of participatory democracy with deliberative qualities. Course: Media and Communication studies C University: Division of Media and Communication, Department of Information Science, Uppsala University Period: Fall 2012 Tutor: Josef Pallas Keywords: Employee empowerment, Employee participation, Intranet, NGO, Deliberative democracy / Sammanfattning Ansatsen med denna uppsats var att undersöka huruvida det finns potential för demokratisk kommunikation inom frivilligorganisationer via intranät. Detta undersöktes genom en kvantitativ innehållsanalys av intranätet Klicks diskussionsforum, vilket tillhör frivilligorganisationen RFSU, med frågeställningen: I vilken utsträckning representeras auktoriteter respektive medlemmar på intranätet Klicks diskussionsforum? Vilken/vilka kommunikationsmässiga funktioner av social funktion, kunskapsöverföring och debatt har inläggen publicerade i intranätet Klicks diskussionsforum? Praktiseras deliberativa diskussioner i diskussionsforumets trådar på intranätet Klick? Uppsatsen utgår från teori om deliberativ demokrati. För att underbygga teorin har teoretiska perspektiv som berör medbestämmande och deltagande tillämpats, vilka härstammar från ämnesområdena organisationsteori samt internkommunikation. Resultatet visar att 63,4 procent av de aktiva på diskussionsforumet utgjordes av kategorin auktoriteter medan kategorin medlemmar utgjordes av 36, 6 procent. Resultatet för de kommunikationsmässiga funktionerna var att den kunskapsöverförande funktionen återfanns i 75, 7 procent av inläggen, funktionen debatt i 33, 3 procent och den sociala funktionen i 23, 3 procent av inläggen. För deliberativ diskussion studerades, istället för enskilda inlägg, hela diskussionstrådar. Den största delen av diskussionstrådarna bedömdes vara neutrala vilka utgjorde 86, 6 procent medan deliberativa diskussioner utgjorde 13,2 procent. 0 procent av diskussionstrådarna ansågs vara icke-deliberativa. Undersökningen har funnit många exempel på förekomst av demokratisk kommunikation på Klick vilket visar att denna är möjlig via intranät. Dock kan det låga deltagandet sett till medlemmar som helhet samt överrepresentationen av auktoriteter argumenteras för att inte tolkas som demokratisk kommunikation med hänvisning till den valda definitionen av demokrati, modellen deltagardemokrati med deliberativa kvaliteter. Nyckelord: Employee empowerment, Employee participation, Intranät, Frivilligorganisation, Deliberativ demokrati

Deliberative democrats have argued that democracy requires citizens to seek consensus, using a familiar style of principle-based moral argument. However, critics like Iris Young object that deliberative democracy’s favoured model of reasoning is inadequate for resolving deep value conflicts. She and others have suggested that the aim of improving understanding across political differences could be achieved if our conception of legitimate democratic discourse were broadened to include a significant role for narrative. The question is whether such a revision would amount to abandoning the deliberative democratic goal of seeking reasonable resolutions of value conflict. This thesis argues that a narrative approach to deliberative democracy can realize its commitment to reasoned justification, while preserving the significance of differing perspectives and promoting mutual understanding. The narrative-contextualist approach is developed and illustrated with reference to public debate over issues such as cultural accommodation and historical justice.

In an attempt to lend legitimacy to the troubled wolf project and to root policies in wolf-affected counties, decision-making was decentralized to stakeholder-based county wildlife management delegations in Sweden in 2009. Drawing from Habermas’ critical theory, this paper suggests that a phenomenon of instrumental rationality is currently circumscribing free and open deliberation in these delegations. Consequently, stakeholders remain fixed in their predetermined positions as wolf-skeptic hunters or pro-wolf conservationists, unable to be swayed by the deliberative process. The aim of this paper is to identify the barriers to deliberation that account for the perseverance of this strategic stakeholder rationality. Three county wildlife delegations are investigated as examples of this. The paper identifies the following four barriers, which are traced to instrumentality: strong sense of accountability, overly purposive atmosphere, overemphasis on decision as final outcome and perceived inability on the part of the delegates to influence decision-making, which is found by and large to still be ruled by scientists. Through these findings, it suggests that such barriers cause delegates to censor their own discursive attempts and to act with strategic rather than with communicative rationality toward the decision-making process. Finally, the paper concludes that the effect of instrumentality in these delegations is currently leading to (1) a crisis of legitimacy for the wolf project, as according to Habermas’ theory and (2) reduced individual freedom under the pursuit of sustainable development, as freedom has been confined to the dimension of the protection and promotion of private interests.

<p>In this dissertation, I advance a new interpretation of the meaning and political implications of Isaiah Berlin's theory of value pluralism. My argument focuses on two puzzles within the literature on value pluralism: first, value pluralist political theorists advance a variety of differing political views on an ostensibly value pluralist basis; second, and more deeply, their writings betray significant ambiguity on what value pluralism means in the first place. I identify two central sources of these problems. First, two distinct sets of ideas in Berlin's work, which I label the "moral-practical" and "societal groupings" versions of value pluralism, are persistently conflated by both Berlin and more recent value pluralist theorists. Second, attempts to justify a political view on the basis of value pluralism run aground on a "priority problem" stemming from the central value pluralist concept of incommensurability. In my approach, I maintain the distinction between the moral-practical and societal groupings theories, focusing on the moral-practical version as a more original and less well-understood contribution of Berlin's thought. I also develop a strategy, which I call "giving incommensurability its due," that avoids the priority problem by focusing on metaethical (or second-order), epistemic, and procedural considerations. This strategy supports two major sets of political implications: a liberal-constitutional framework of basic rights and liberties, and a robust, vibrant form of participatory and deliberative democratic politics. This turn to democracy constitutes an important shift vis-à-vis the current literature, which has, up to now, been preoccupied with value pluralism's relationship to liberalism.</p> / Dissertation

This paper will use political discussion programs in Taiwan as an example and use the research method of experimentation to attempt to establish a way of research that is both quantitative and qualitative. By using a correlation analysis of audience evaluation and ratings, an investigation will be carried out as to whether Taiwan¡¦s political discussion programs are in fact public forums that are a paradigm of a deliberative democracy. In order to test the hypothesis that states there is a correlation between audience evaluation and ratings, this paper made audience evaluation (in other words the topics discussed on the programs, their hosts, guests, producers and their negative effects) an independent variable and made the AGB Nielsen television rating numbers a dependent variable. It was discovered that audience evaluation does in fact affect ratings and that there is a positive correlation between audience evaluation and ratings. For example, the higher an audience¡¦s evaluation of the topics discussed on a certain program and its hosts, guests and producers were, the higher that particular program¡¦s ratings were. If on the other hand, audiences believe that a certain political discussion program has negative effects such as encouraging opposition within society or defaming a certain person or group, the lower the ratings of that particular program were. From the results of the correlation analysis of audience evaluation and ratings, it can be seen that there is a huge difference between what viewers expect from political discussion programs and what our current political discussion programs are like. It was also discovered that whilst today¡¦s political discussion programs claim they are public forums; they are in reality primarily aimed at making commercial profit. This means that these programs are still a long way away from becoming a paradigm for a deliberative democracy and making Taiwan a more democratic society.

<p>After the appointment of a new European Commission in 2004, “communication” was made a top priority on the agenda. The Commission presented a new communication policy, which would establish a dialogue with the citizens, thereby bringing more democracy to the union and bridging the gap to the citizens. Three documents containing the policy were published, namely an internal action plan for the Commission, Plan D which establishes the framework for national debates and a whitepaper on EU communication policy. These documents were met by mistrust and criticism from many different actors such as journalists and experts.</p><p>The aim of this master thesis is to examine this new communication policy from a deliberative democratic perspective. The thesis asks whether the new policy has a potential of contributing to deliberative democracy, by investigating the documents from a discursive point of view. Deliberative democracy focuses mainly on public discussions and the generation of a general will by public conversation where every one has a right to participate on equal terms. This thesis uses a discursive interpretation, as stated by the philosopher Jürgen Habermas, where the public sphere and political rights which constitutes the public area plays an important role. The theoretical perspective is used in the thesis to understand and assess the policy.</p><p>To be able to draw conclusions, the new communication policy is searched for discursive ideas and the occurrence is analyzed by a both qualitative and quantitative text analysis. The analysis shows that the policy includes a lot of actions that goes well along with a discursive perspective, as defined in the thesis, although some important considerations are missing. The new communication policy as presented by the European Commission has therefore a good potential of contributing to deliberative democracy in the Union.</p><p>The policy is also discussed in relation to the criticism that has been presented regarding the theory of deliberative democracy. The thesis shows that the communication policy includes actions which decrease the importance of this criticism, allowing for the policy to possibly contribute to European democracy and decreasing the democratic deficit.</p>

The addition of random selection to our arsenal of methods for selecting political officials would enhance performance against norms of representative democracy. I employ historical and analytic methods to explore the nature of sortition and its relation to political equality, rational decision-making, and legitimate representation. Sortition both expresses a democratic commitment to political equality and facilitates improved performance under this democratic norm. It can be rational to eschew reasons in the process of selecting political officials, and decision-making bodies chosen randomly can be expected to make good decisions. I also address concerns stemming from representative norms, surrounding random selection of officials, arguing that random selection can enhance the resemblance and responsiveness of representatives. Finally, I detail some possibilities for institutional arrangements that would deliver the benefits of sortition while addressing the challenges it presents. / text

Studiecirkeln är en pedagogisk praktik som tillskrivs en roll i den svenska demokratin. Studiecirkelns genomförande svarar väl mot en demokratisk praktik som framställs i deliberativ demokratiteori. Avhandlingens idé är att belysa deliberativ demokratiteori med empiri. Med studier av studiecirkelsamtal ges möjlighet att diskutera teorin med samtalsdata. Samtalsdata genererades genom analyser av ett videoinspelat cirkelsamtal som handlade om hållbar utveckling. Studiens teoretiska ram visar fyra olika bidraga till den deliberativa demokratiteorin. Dessa presenteras i en indelning som skiljer mellan något som i avhandlingen kallas för den rationella argumentationens överläggning och en retoriskt orienterade överläggning. Genom denna indelning ges fler möjligheter att tolka fenomen i samtalsempirin och vice versa. Beträffade åsiktsbildningen i studiecirkelsamtalet finner man att cirkeldeltagarna berör en mängd olika företeelser. I detta urskiljs deltagares egna åsikter samt föreställningar som är producerade i normativa sfärer. Samtalsprocessen kännetecknas att den varierar från en period till en annan. Det gör att tillgängligheten för deltagare att kunna bidra med och ta del av yttranden varierar. Resultaten reser frågor till teorin om tolkningen av vissa begrepp. / In Sweden study circles are viewed as a vital part of the democracy due to the opportunity of the participants to deliberate. The way that the study circles work corresponds well with the notion of democratic deliberations promoted in theories of deliberative democracy. The main idea with this thesis is to elucidate the theory of deliberative democracy with empirical data from deliberations in a study circle. There are several contributions to the theory of deliberative democracy. In the thesis a distinction is made between theories that focus on the rational argument and theories that accept rhetorical speech as complement to the rational argument. In short the results show that the study circle conversation in one sense qualifies as a democratic deliberation. The participants are free to argue and allowed to have different views. When it comes to the contents of the conversation two systems of categories illustrate their formation of views. One categorisation illustrates that the participants use a wide range of opinions. The second categorisation stresses that the views of the participants were influenced by different sources. The analysis of the conversation shows a complex pattern of communication that differs from one period to another. This raises questions on how concepts used in the theories will be understood and interpreted in the light of empirical data.