aspects of deliberation
==Theories of Deliberation==
===Jorgan Haberamas===
====Rationality====
Rationality as the ability to manipulate the world in efficient way or make explisit arguments and stand criticisem<ref>Habermas, J. (1986). Communicative rationality and the theories of meaning and action. Habermas (1998f), 183–214.</ref>
====Public Sphare====
In his historical analysis, Habermas points out three so-called "institutional criteria" as preconditions for the emergence of the new public sphere. The discursive arenas, such as Britain’s coffee houses, France’s salons and Germany’s Tischgesellschaften "may have differed in the size and compositions of their publics, the style of their proceedings, the climate of their debates, and their topical orientations", but "they all organized discussion among people that tended to be ongoing; hence they had a number of institutional criteria in common":[22]
* '''Disregard of status''': Preservation of "a kind of social intercourse that, far from presupposing the equality of status, disregarded status altogether. [...] Not that this idea of the public was actually realized in earnest in the coffee houses, salons, and the societies; but as an idea it had become institutionalized and thereby stated as an objective claim. If not realized, it was at least consequential." (loc.cit.)
* '''Domain of common concern''': "... discussion within such a public presupposed the problematization of areas that until then had not been questioned. The domain of ‘common concern’ which was the object of public critical attention remained a preserve in which church and state authorities had the monopoly of interpretation. [...] The private people for whom the cultural product became available as a commodity profaned it inasmuch as they had to determine its meaning on their own (by way of rational communication with one another), verbalize it, and thus state explicitly what precisely in its implicitness for so long could assert its authority." (loc.cit.)
* '''Inclusivity''': However exclusive the public might be in any given instance, it could never close itself off entirely and become consolidated as a clique; for it always understood and found itself immersed within a more inclusive public of all private people, persons who – insofar as they were propertied and educated – as readers, listeners, and spectators could avail themselves via the market of the objects that were subject to discussion. The issues discussed became ‘general’ not merely in their significance, but also in their accessibility: everyone had to be able to participate. [...] Wherever the public established itself institutionally as a stable group of discussants, it did not equate itself with the public but at most claimed to act as its mouthpiece, in its name, perhaps even as its educator – the new form of bourgeois representation" (loc.cit.).(from <ref>[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_sphere#J.C3.BCrgen_Habermas:_bourgeois_public_sphere Public sphere. Public sphere. (2014, March 16). In Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia.]</ref>)
===Cohen Joshua===
From <ref>Cohen, J. (1989). Deliberation and democratic legitimacy. Debates in Contemporary Political Philosophy, 342.</ref>
'''The public good and not the sector good''':
:Based on Rawl's justice: In a well-ordered [[democracy]], political debate is organized around alternative conceptions of the public good. So an ideal pluralist scheme, in which democratic politics consists of fair bargaining among groups each of which pursues its particular or sectional interest, is unsuited to a just society<ref>Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice (Cambridge. Mass.: Harvard University.p360-361</ref>Citizens and parties operating in the political arena ought not to ‘take a narrow or group-interested standpoint’ (p. 360). And parties should only be responsive to demands that are ‘argued for openly by reference to a conception of the public good’ (pp. 226, 472).Public explanations and justifications of laws and policies are to be cast in terms of conceptions of the [[common good]] (conceptions that, on Rawls’s view, must be consistent with the [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPWpvpgZY9g two principles of justice]), and public deliberation should aim to work out the details of such conceptions and to apply them to particular issues of public policy (p. 362).
In debate and common disccusions in the Knesset, parties are arguing for their narrow intrests, and not the common good. Deliberation should help a common good resulotions.
'''In a just society political opportunities and powers must be independent of economic or social position''':
It should be taken care that the political decisions are not influenced by concentrations of money and social class<ref>Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice (Cambridge. Mass.: Harvard University. pp. 225–6, 277–8; 1982, pp.42–3.</ref>
'''The development of of political competence''':
:Third, democratic politics should be ordered in ways that provide a basis for selfrespect,that encourage the development of a sense of political competence, and that contribute to the formation of a sense of justice.it should fix ‘the foundations for civic friendship and [shape] the ethos of political culture’ (Rawls, J. (1971). A Theory of Justice (Cambridge. Mass.: Harvard University. p. 234).
'''Sum:'''
When properly conducted, then, democratic politics involves public deliberation focused on the ''common good,'' requires some form of manifest ''equality among citizens'',and shapes ''the identity and interests of citizens'' in ways that contribute to the formation of a ''public conception of common good''.
====Five defentions of Deliberative process====
# '''A Continuous system for governing the group''': A deliberative democracy is an ongoing and independent association, whose members expect it to continue into the indefinite future.
# '''To their deliberation there are results''': The members of the association share (and it is common knowledge that they share) the view that the appropriate terms of association provide a framework for or are the results of their deliberation. They share, that is, a commitment to coordinating their activities within institutions that make deliberation possible and according to norms that they arrive at through their deliberation. For them, free deliberation among equals is the basis of legitimacy.
# '''Plurality of minds''': A deliberative democracy is a pluralistic association. The members have diverse preferences, convictions and ideals concerning the conduct of their own lives. While sharing a commitment to the deliberative resolution of problems of collective choice (D2), they also have divergent aims, and do not think that some particular set of preferences, convictions or ideals is mandatory.
# '''Connection between disicions and results as source of legitmecy''': Because the members of a democratic association regard deliberative procedures as the source of legitimacy, it is important to them that the terms of their association not merely be the results of their deliberation, but also be manifest to them as such. They prefer institutions in which the connections between deliberation and outcomes are evident to ones in which the connections are less clear.
# '''Every body is capble of deliberating''': The members recognize one another as having deliberative capacities, i.e. the capacities required for entering into a public exchange of reasons and for acting on the result of such public reasoning.
====Three steps of Deliberation====
For a deliberative process there are three steps:
# There is a need to decide on an agenda.
# To propose alternative solutions to the problems on the agenda.Supporting those solutions with reasons.
# Conclude by settling on an alternative.
====Priciples of Deliberation====
# Deliberation is free. No other force then reason can be used.
# Parites should use reason to explain their motives and solutions.
# All parties are equal.
# Deliberation strive to achive rationaly motivated consensus. If not, it will reach majority role by voting.
===Gutmann and Thompson's model===
Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson’s definition captures the elements that are found in most conceptions of deliberative democracy. They define it as “a form of government in which free and equal citizens and their representatives justify decisions in a process in which they give one another reasons that are mutually acceptable and generally accessible, with the aim of reaching decisions that are binding on all at present but open to challenge in the future.”<ref>Gutmann, Amy, and Dennis Thompson (2004). ''Why Deliberative Democracy?'' pp. 3-7.</ref>
They state that deliberative democracy has four requirements, which refer to the kind of reasons that citizens and their representatives are expected to give to one another:
# Reciprocal. The reasons should be acceptable to free and equal persons seeking fair terms of cooperation.
# Accessible. The reasons must be given in public and the content must be understandable to the relevant audience.
# Binding. The reason-giving process leads to a decision or law that is enforced for some period of time. The participants do not deliberate just for the sake of deliberation or for individual enlightenment.
# Dynamic or Provisional. The participants must keep open the possibility of changing their minds, and continuing a reason-giving dialogue that can challenge previous decisions and laws.
===A Theory of Deliberation===
[[a theory of deliberation]]
==Deliberation Effects==