This thesis will argue that one of the main challenges for deliberative democracy is the lack of attention paid to the different modes of deliberative practices. The theories of deliberative democracy often treat deliberation as a decision-making process. Yet, I would argue that this approach fails to appreciate the full benefits of deliberation because it ignores the fundamental role that the social learning phase of deliberation plays in reconciling differences. Hence I argue for a deliberative framework in which social learning and decision-making moments of deliberation are analytically differentiated so that the resources of social learning are freed from the pressures of decision-making procedures and are therefore no longer subordinated to the terms of decision-making.¶ This is particularly important for countries such as Turkey where divisions cut deep across society. A case study examines the discourses of the Turkish public sphere regarding Islam, democracy and secularism to identify the kinds of discourses present in relation to the topic in question. By analysing the types of discourses through Q methodology the study reveals points of convergence and divergence between discourses, hence provides significant insight into how deliberation oriented to social learning can play a substantive role in reconciling differences between sharply divided groups.