Actions

Difference between revisions of "Main Page"

From Deliberative Democracy Institiute Wiki

(Cognitive Elements of Decision Making)
(Introduction)
 
(90 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
<p style="font-size: 200%;  line-height: 1.3">''Delib.org''</p>
+
<p style="font-size: 200%;  line-height: 1.3">''On Deliberation</p>
<p style="font-size: 125%;  line-height: 1.3">A Software and a Theory about Deliberative Democracy</p>
+
<p style="font-size: 125%;  line-height: 1.3">Theory and Practice in Deliberative Democracy</p>
 +
<p style="font-size: 170%;  line-height: 1.5">By [[user:WinSysop|Tal Yaron]]</p>
 
<br>
 
<br>
  
<p style="font-size: 115%;  line-height: 1.3">[http://delib.org Delib.org] is a web-app for deliberative democracy. Her goals are to help groups reach educated decision togther, based on the [[Values of deliberative-democracy|values]] and theories of deliberative democracy.</p>
+
===Our Mission===
 +
The objective of this wiki-paper is to foster a culture that embraces the principles of deliberation and democratic decision-making while also advancing the corresponding methodologies and technologies. In pursuit of this mission, we are formulating a comprehensive theory of deliberative democracy. This theory draws on insights from various interdisciplinary fields, including [[Epistemology|philosophy]], neuroscience, and the extensive literature on deliberative democracy within the social sciences.
  
Delib is developed under MIT open-source license, with the aim of helping researchers and industry promote better understanding and better applications for deliberative democracy. Researchers and enthusiastic of deliberative democracy are encouraged to contribute their [https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/delib-democracy knowledge] and [https://github.com/delib-org/delib-fron2 code] to delib community.
+
<br>
<p></p>
 
<p></p>
 
 
<p>'''Editing & Contributions''': If you want to help editing or writing in this wiki, please contact tal dot yaron at gmail dot com.</p>
 
<p>'''Editing & Contributions''': If you want to help editing or writing in this wiki, please contact tal dot yaron at gmail dot com.</p>
  
 
__TOC__
 
__TOC__
  
==Abstract==
+
==Introduction==
[[Deliberative democracy]] is a democracy, in which citizens take part in decision making. It claims that every citizen should have an equal voice, every citizen should have equal influence in the shaping of public solutions. It manifests that when making a public decisions, every option should be taken into account, even if it’s owners does not have much education in the subject. The reason for that, is that every citizen has her own interests in the public decision, and they may be influenced from the choices the dicision body will make.
+
Deliberative democracy is a democratic approach that places citizen deliberation at its core, emphasizing broad public involvement in decision-making processes. It champions the idea that all citizens should have an equal voice and influence in shaping public solutions, regardless of their level of expertise on the subject. This principle stems from the recognition that each citizen has a stake in public decisions, which can profoundly impact their lives.
 +
 
 +
However, the challenge arises when attempting to include every citizen in the deliberative process, as it can lead to lengthy and unwieldy meetings. Many individuals aspire to contribute their perspectives, propose unique solutions, or critique existing ideas. While noble in principle, this equal deliberation can become a laborious and time-consuming endeavor. For instance, granting each resident an equal say in a small town could extend deliberations for years. As the decision-making body expands, so does the time and energy required to reach an equitable decision. Unfortunately, this protracted process can deter participation, ultimately undermining the goal of equal deliberation.
 +
 
 +
To uphold the ideals of equal deliberation while streamlining the process to accommodate larger populations, it is imperative to gain a deeper understanding of how deliberation functions, including its constituent elements and their interactions. By comprehending these dynamics, we can propose more efficient methods for public deliberation and even develop innovative applications to facilitate the engagement of extensive citizen groups in public decision-making.
 +
 
 +
On this website, we will present a comprehensive theory that elucidates the critical elements of deliberation and how they interact. Subsequently, we will scrutinize prevalent deliberation practices through the lens of this theory. Finally, we will outline a roadmap for the future of deliberative democracy and develop applications designed to enhance the deliberative process. Our current project, [http://delib-5.web.app delib-5], is an example of this initiative, and its source code is available [https://github.com/talyaron/delib-5-p here].
  
Yet letting every citizen participate in the discussion, and influence the option taken by the public, results tedious and everlasting meetings. Many citizens want to shape the solution, while many others want to propose their own unique solutions, while others want to criticize the ideas brought to the table. Equal deliberation may be a very cumbersome process that takes huge amounts of energy and time. If all residents of a small town would have the same influence on the solutions proposed, the deliberation may take years. As the body of decision makers grows, so do the time and energy it takes to make an equal decision. Because of its tediousness many citizens prefer not to participate in it, and therefore making equal deliberation a null.
+
==The Challenges==
 +
The deliberation process is fraught with substantial challenges, as it necessitates the meaningful engagement of diverse individuals in decision-making, all while meticulously accounting for each unique perspective. This chapter delves into the intricacies of these challenges.
  
So, if we want to keep the ideals of deliberation of real equality, while making the process efficient and suited for the participating of thousands and millions, we have to learn how deliberation works. What are her elements, and how they interact with each other. If we will be able to understand the element we will be able to suggest more efficient ways to conduct equal public deliberation, and even invent new application that may help larger groups of citizens engage in the public decisions.
+
===Definition of deliberation===
 +
Deliberation is an [[organization|organizational]] collaborative decision-making process aiming at finding the organization's [[optimal course of action]] which will result in the best outcomes for the [[stakeholders]], using minimal resources of the organization. In deliberation, all members of the organization are considered equal, all relevant information is taken into account, and the information is validated (see more on [[Values of deliberative-democracy]]).
  
In this web-site we will suggest a theory which will explain the elements of deliberation, and their interactions. We then will investigate into common practice of deliberation and analyze them according to the theory. Lastly, we will suggest future process for deliberative democracy. We will develop apps for deliberative democracy. The current app we are working on is [http://www.delib.org delib.org]. The code for delib can be found [https://github.com/delib-org/delib-fron2 here].
+
[[Deliberation|Read more...]]
  
==Introduction==
 
 
===Values of Deliberation===
 
===Values of Deliberation===
[[Values of deliberative-democracy]]
+
Within a democratic framework, the foundational principle lies in the equality of all citizens, where each individual's rights and needs are accorded equal significance in the eyes of the democratic decision-making apparatus. To effectively address the diverse needs and concerns of all citizens within this decision-making context, scholars of deliberative democracy have put forth a set of core values that deliberators should adhere to in their deliberative endeavors.
  
In a democracy, all citizens are considered as equal members in society, with equal rights to take part in public decision making. To ensure that all citizens could take part in decision making , scholars of deliberative democracy suggested the public decision should follow these values:
+
[[Values of deliberative-democracy|Read more...]]
  
'''Free and falsifiable knowledge''': Decisions should be based upon corroborated knowledge, which is knowledge that was tested and verified by the public<ref>Popper, K. (2002). The Logic of Scientific Discovery (Routledge Classics). Routledge. Retrieved from http://www.amazon.com/Logic-Scientific-Discovery-Routledge-Classics/dp/0415278449</ref><ref>Popper, Karl Sir. The open society and its enemies. Routledge, 2012.‏</ref><ref>Habermas, J. (1986). Communicative rationality and the theories of meaning and action. Habermas (1998f), 183–214.</ref>. All public knowledge is transparant and is ready for public analysis and [[inclusiv information|understanding]]<ref>[http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups/public/documents/NISPAcee/UNPAN006507.pdf Dror, Yebezkel. "Transparency and openness of quality democracy." Openness and transparency in governance: Challenges and opportunities (1999): 25-43.]‏</ref>. The public enjoy free public sphere to deliberate <ref>Habermas, Jürgen. "The public sphere: An encyclopedia article." Media and cultural studies (2001): 73.‏</ref>. Deliberation is free. No other force other than reason can be used<ref>Cohen, J. (1989). Deliberation and democratic legitimacy. Debates in Contemporary Political Philosophy, 342.</ref>. The public deliberate on common concerns<ref>Habermas 1989:xi</ref>.
+
=== Personal Criterion for selecting options ===
 +
In choosing among competing alternatives, it becomes imperative to establish a framework for assessing and distinguishing superior solutions from inferior ones. This chapter undertakes the exploration of criteria employed by participants in the determination of the most favorable solution.
 +
[[Personal Optimising ROI Selection Criterion]] (GPORSC)
 +
===Deliberation-action cycle===
 +
Although a valuable framework, deliberation does not guarantee foolproof outcomes in the quest for optimal solutions. In this chapter, we put forward a proposal aimed at enhancing the caliber of solutions put forth and chosen by participants.
  
'''Inclusive and equal''': According to Habermas, Deliberation is Inclusive, which means, every citizen, no matter what his qualities should be able to participate on equal terms, without discrimination due to economic, education or other causes: Citizens must have adequate and equal opportunities to form their preference and place questions on the public agenda and express reasons for one outcome over the other. Their voting is equal, and the knowledge should be engaged in a mannar that will let every participant effectivly understand the subject in hand<ref>Dahl, R. A. (1989). Democracy and its critiques. New Haven: Yale University Press.</ref>.
+
[[deliberation-action cycle]]
  
'''Openess''':The participants must keep open the possibility of changing their minds, and continuing a reason-giving dialogue that can challenge previous decisions and laws<ref>Gutmann, Amy, and Dennis Thompson (2004). Why Deliberative Democracy? pp. 3-7.</ref>.
+
==The Elements==
 +
To successfully understand deliberation, we suggest that we first have to understand the elements of decision making. The elements are divided into several areas. The first area is the area of cognitive elements, which are the elements that interact in the brain to facilitate a decision. Next is the area of the group in decision making - which elements are crucial for decision making in groups.  Then comes the area of communication medium. In this area, we will describe the elements that influence the transformation of information between the group members. In the next areas, we will deal with the psychological, sociological and organizational elements.
  
'''Political capbilities''':The public develop political competence (Cohen). The public control the process of deliberation and the agenda (Dahl).
+
===The epistemic elements of decision making===
 +
Every deliberation Is based on knowledge. Usually, participants don't possess the same body of knowledge and may defer by their worldviews. Therefore understanding how knowledge is built, Is essential for creating a coherent knowledge base for all participants. In this section, we will describe how knowledge is built, and how to corroborate it.
  
'''Learning from exprience''':The government follows the public decision, the actions and the results are transparent, and the public can learn and improve future decisions (Cohen).
+
[[The epistemic elements of decision making|Read more...]]
  
===Problems in deliberation===
+
===The Logical elements of decision making===
  
==The Elements==
+
The basic entities of decision making in a group, are her members. Every member that takes part in the decision, uses a cognitive process to gather information and make a decision. So, the first step in understanding deliberation is to describe these personal cognitive elements that members are using to make their decisions. When we will understand the personal cognitive elements, we will be able to start to understand the more complex interaction between the members.  
To successfully engage and understand deliberation I will suggest that we first have to understand the elements of decision making. The elements are divided into several areas. The first area is the area of cognitive elements, which are the elements that interacts in the brain to facilitate a decision. Next is the area of the group in decision making. Which elements are crucial for decision making in groups. Then come the area of communication medium. In this area we will describe the elements that influence the transformation of information between the group members. In the next areas, we will deal with the psychological, sociological and organizational elements.
 
  
===The cognitive elements of decision making===
+
[[The cognitive elements of decision making|read more...]]
  
The basic entities of decision making in a group, are here members. Every member that takes part in decision, uses cognitive process to gather information and make decision. So, the first step in understanding deliberation is to describe these personal cognitive elements that members are using to make their decisions. When we will understand the personal cognitive elements, we will be able to start to understand the more complex interaction between the members.
+
===Neuropsychology Elements in decision making===
 +
Decsions are conducted in a "logical" the manner through [[the cognitive elements of decision making]]. Yet this "logical" thinking is mostly not common. usually people are influenced by an "illogical" ways of thinking. scientists from several disciplines were able to describe these "illogical" ways of thinking, and some of the neural and cognitive mechanism that produce the "illogical" thinking.
  
'''[[The cognitive elements of decision making]]'''
+
[[neuropsychology elements in decision making|Read more]]
  
 +
===Psychological Elements in decision making===
 +
[[Psychological elements in decision making]]
 
===Group Elements in Decision Making===
 
===Group Elements in Decision Making===
[[The group in decision making]]
+
Every deliberation takes place in the context of a group. The group settings and properties may have a large influence on the psychology of the members and the outcome of deliberation. Also, during deliberation, the group may change, as different stakeholders find interest in the decision making. Understanding the factors that within the group and between the group and other groups, is essential to understand mastering of deliberation.
  
===Medium Elemnts in Decision Making===
+
[[The group in decision making|Read more]]
[[medium in decision making]]
 
  
===Psychology Elements in Decision Making===
+
===Medium Elements in Decision Making===
[[Psychology in decision making]]
+
The Medium which the group is using may have great influence on the deliberative process. For instance, synchronic medium may allow only one participant at a time talk, thus prolonging the time needed for deliberation exponentially as the number of equal participants grow. On the other hand, a-synchronic medium may allow simultaneity of information send and receiving, and thus, reduce the time needed for deliberation. In this chapter we will talk about the effect of the medium on deliberation.
  
===Sociology Elements in Decision Making===
+
[[medium in decision making|Read more]]
[[Sociology in decision making]]
 
  
===Organizations Elements in Decision Making===
+
===Organizational Elements in Decision Making===
 
[[Organizations in Decision Making]]
 
[[Organizations in Decision Making]]
  
 
==Processes==
 
==Processes==
===Personal Decision Making===
+
[[General process of deliberation]]
 +
===Face To Face===
 +
====Personal Decision Making====
 
[[system 1|system 1 decision making]]
 
[[system 1|system 1 decision making]]
 +
====Group Deliberation====
 +
[[Methods in deliberative democracy]]
  
==Compering the Model to Deleberative Methods==
+
===Technologies of Deliberation===
[[Methods in deliberative democracy]]
+
[[Technologies for deliberation]]
  
==Bulding New Methods According to the Model==
+
==Concerns==
 +
Digital deliberative democracy can be hacked by foreign governments<ref>[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10361146.2021.2023093?scroll=top&needAccess=true Dowling, M.-E. (2022). Foreign interference and digital democracy: is digital era governance putting Australia at risk? <i>Australian Journal of Political Science</i>, <i>0</i>(0), 1–16.]</ref>.
  
 
==See Also==
 
==See Also==

Latest revision as of 09:26, 2 June 2024

On Deliberation

Theory and Practice in Deliberative Democracy

By Tal Yaron


Our Mission

The objective of this wiki-paper is to foster a culture that embraces the principles of deliberation and democratic decision-making while also advancing the corresponding methodologies and technologies. In pursuit of this mission, we are formulating a comprehensive theory of deliberative democracy. This theory draws on insights from various interdisciplinary fields, including philosophy, neuroscience, and the extensive literature on deliberative democracy within the social sciences.


Editing & Contributions: If you want to help editing or writing in this wiki, please contact tal dot yaron at gmail dot com.

Introduction

Deliberative democracy is a democratic approach that places citizen deliberation at its core, emphasizing broad public involvement in decision-making processes. It champions the idea that all citizens should have an equal voice and influence in shaping public solutions, regardless of their level of expertise on the subject. This principle stems from the recognition that each citizen has a stake in public decisions, which can profoundly impact their lives.

However, the challenge arises when attempting to include every citizen in the deliberative process, as it can lead to lengthy and unwieldy meetings. Many individuals aspire to contribute their perspectives, propose unique solutions, or critique existing ideas. While noble in principle, this equal deliberation can become a laborious and time-consuming endeavor. For instance, granting each resident an equal say in a small town could extend deliberations for years. As the decision-making body expands, so does the time and energy required to reach an equitable decision. Unfortunately, this protracted process can deter participation, ultimately undermining the goal of equal deliberation.

To uphold the ideals of equal deliberation while streamlining the process to accommodate larger populations, it is imperative to gain a deeper understanding of how deliberation functions, including its constituent elements and their interactions. By comprehending these dynamics, we can propose more efficient methods for public deliberation and even develop innovative applications to facilitate the engagement of extensive citizen groups in public decision-making.

On this website, we will present a comprehensive theory that elucidates the critical elements of deliberation and how they interact. Subsequently, we will scrutinize prevalent deliberation practices through the lens of this theory. Finally, we will outline a roadmap for the future of deliberative democracy and develop applications designed to enhance the deliberative process. Our current project, delib-5, is an example of this initiative, and its source code is available here.

The Challenges

The deliberation process is fraught with substantial challenges, as it necessitates the meaningful engagement of diverse individuals in decision-making, all while meticulously accounting for each unique perspective. This chapter delves into the intricacies of these challenges.

Definition of deliberation

Deliberation is an organizational collaborative decision-making process aiming at finding the organization's optimal course of action which will result in the best outcomes for the stakeholders, using minimal resources of the organization. In deliberation, all members of the organization are considered equal, all relevant information is taken into account, and the information is validated (see more on Values of deliberative-democracy).

Read more...

Values of Deliberation

Within a democratic framework, the foundational principle lies in the equality of all citizens, where each individual's rights and needs are accorded equal significance in the eyes of the democratic decision-making apparatus. To effectively address the diverse needs and concerns of all citizens within this decision-making context, scholars of deliberative democracy have put forth a set of core values that deliberators should adhere to in their deliberative endeavors.

Read more...

Personal Criterion for selecting options

In choosing among competing alternatives, it becomes imperative to establish a framework for assessing and distinguishing superior solutions from inferior ones. This chapter undertakes the exploration of criteria employed by participants in the determination of the most favorable solution. Personal Optimising ROI Selection Criterion (GPORSC)

Deliberation-action cycle

Although a valuable framework, deliberation does not guarantee foolproof outcomes in the quest for optimal solutions. In this chapter, we put forward a proposal aimed at enhancing the caliber of solutions put forth and chosen by participants.

deliberation-action cycle

The Elements

To successfully understand deliberation, we suggest that we first have to understand the elements of decision making. The elements are divided into several areas. The first area is the area of cognitive elements, which are the elements that interact in the brain to facilitate a decision. Next is the area of the group in decision making - which elements are crucial for decision making in groups. Then comes the area of communication medium. In this area, we will describe the elements that influence the transformation of information between the group members. In the next areas, we will deal with the psychological, sociological and organizational elements.

The epistemic elements of decision making

Every deliberation Is based on knowledge. Usually, participants don't possess the same body of knowledge and may defer by their worldviews. Therefore understanding how knowledge is built, Is essential for creating a coherent knowledge base for all participants. In this section, we will describe how knowledge is built, and how to corroborate it.

Read more...

The Logical elements of decision making

The basic entities of decision making in a group, are her members. Every member that takes part in the decision, uses a cognitive process to gather information and make a decision. So, the first step in understanding deliberation is to describe these personal cognitive elements that members are using to make their decisions. When we will understand the personal cognitive elements, we will be able to start to understand the more complex interaction between the members.

read more...

Neuropsychology Elements in decision making

Decsions are conducted in a "logical" the manner through the cognitive elements of decision making. Yet this "logical" thinking is mostly not common. usually people are influenced by an "illogical" ways of thinking. scientists from several disciplines were able to describe these "illogical" ways of thinking, and some of the neural and cognitive mechanism that produce the "illogical" thinking.

Read more

Psychological Elements in decision making

Psychological elements in decision making

Group Elements in Decision Making

Every deliberation takes place in the context of a group. The group settings and properties may have a large influence on the psychology of the members and the outcome of deliberation. Also, during deliberation, the group may change, as different stakeholders find interest in the decision making. Understanding the factors that within the group and between the group and other groups, is essential to understand mastering of deliberation.

Read more

Medium Elements in Decision Making

The Medium which the group is using may have great influence on the deliberative process. For instance, synchronic medium may allow only one participant at a time talk, thus prolonging the time needed for deliberation exponentially as the number of equal participants grow. On the other hand, a-synchronic medium may allow simultaneity of information send and receiving, and thus, reduce the time needed for deliberation. In this chapter we will talk about the effect of the medium on deliberation.

Read more

Organizational Elements in Decision Making

Organizations in Decision Making

Processes

General process of deliberation

Face To Face

Personal Decision Making

system 1 decision making

Group Deliberation

Methods in deliberative democracy

Technologies of Deliberation

Technologies for deliberation

Concerns

Digital deliberative democracy can be hacked by foreign governments[1].

See Also

old main page

References