Talk:Deliberation

Law Mid‑importance

	Law portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Law, an attempt at providing a comprehensive, standardised, pan-jurisdictional and up-to-date resource for the legal field and the subjects encompassed by it.LawWikipedia:WikiProject LawTemplate:WikiProject Lawlaw articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Philosophy: Logic / Social and political Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.PhilosophyWikipedia:WikiProject PhilosophyTemplate:WikiProject PhilosophyPhilosophy articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Associated task forces:
/
	Logic
	Social and political philosophy

.

I'm editing the Online Deliberation page and am suggesting removing information that is more applicable to Deliberation. I'll paste the information below since someone may want to use it here. UWCLStudentSpring2021 (talk) 12:56, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Over the past few decades, scholars across research traditions and areas have commonly identified at least two aspects in their definitions of deliberation: (1) a form of communication characterized by "the performance of a set of communicative behaviors that promote thorough group discussion";^[1] and (2) the idea that individuals involved in this process of communication carefully weigh arguments and reasons for and against some propositions posed by others in the group.^[2]^[3] To be considered deliberative discussion, argue scholars, the communication and the involved interactants' behavior has to meet criteria established by the principles of political equality and egalitarian reciprocity.^[1]^[4]^[5]

According to Habermas,^[6] deliberation is "an interchange of rational–critical arguments among a group of individuals, triggered by a common or public problem, whose main focus or topic of discussion is to find a solution acceptable to all who have a stake in the issue".^[5] Halpern and Gibbs define deliberation as "a particular sort of discussion between at least two individuals in which (1) the form of communication emphasizes the use of logic and reasoning instead of power or coercion, (2) this reasoned engagement focuses on a social or political issue through which participants are able to identify solutions to a common problem, and (3) individuals are open to opinions and ideas expressed by others, and at the same time the communication between them is governed by rules of equality, symmetry and civility".^[5] Stroud and colleagues noted that many definitions of deliberation "share the basic idea that deliberation involves people exchanging views on a matter of public importance in a respectful manner, reasoning through their claims, and listening to the perspectives of others".^[7]

Hu, could someone clarify that deliberation is not only a judical term, but also a term in political science (meaning free discussion before decision?) -- till we *) 15:50, 28 Apr 2004 (UTC)

if you are deliberating with some one you are trying to win a battle beetween the two of you or more in the case

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deliberative_democracy

Deliberation: Deliberation is an approach to decision-making in which citizens consider relevant facts from multiple points of view, converse with one another to think critically about options before them and enlarge their perspectives, opinions, and understandings. http://www.deliberative-democracy.net/deliberation/

Deliberative democracy: Deliberative democracy strengthens citizen voices in governance by including people of all races, classes, ages and geographies in deliberations that directly affect public decisions. As a result, citizens influence--and can see the result of their influence on--the policy and resource decisions that impact their daily lives and their future. http://www.deliberative-democracy.net/deliberation/

Both of these are inadequate. Atilla rulez. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.255.148.83 (talk) 23:17, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deliberation Theory -- the citation [3] cannot be verified. Vikiboy1234 (talk) 16:37, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ ^a ^b Burkhalter, Stephanie; Gastil, John; Kelshaw, Todd (2002-11-01). "A Conceptual Definition and Theoretical Model of Public Deliberation in Small Face?to?Face Groups". Communication Theory. 12 (4): 398–422. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2002.tb00276.x. ISSN 1050-3293.
^ Gastil, John (2000). "Is face-to-face citizen deliberation a luxury or a necessity?". Political Communication. 17 (4): 357–361. doi:10.1080/10584600050178960.
^ Schudson, Michael (1997). "Why conversation is not the soul of democracy". Critical Studies in Mass Communication. 14 (4): 297–309. doi:10.1080/15295039709367020.
^ S., Fishkin, James (1991). Democracy and deliberation : new directions for democratic reform. New Haven: Yale University Press. ISBN 9780300051636. OCLC 24067411.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
^ ^a ^b ^c Cite error: The named reference :1 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
^ Jürgen, Habermas (January 1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere : an inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. Cambridge, Mass. ISBN 9780262081801. OCLC 18327374.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
^ Stroud, Natalie Jomini; Scacco, Joshua M.; Muddiman, Ashley; Curry, Alexander L. (2015-03-01). "Changing Deliberative Norms on News Organizations' Facebook Sites". Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 20 (2): 188–203. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12104.

[:2-1] Burkhalter, Stephanie; Gastil, John; Kelshaw, Todd (2002-11-01). "A Conceptual Definition and Theoretical Model of Public Deliberation in Small Face?to?Face Groups". Communication Theory. 12 (4): 398–422. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2002.tb00276.x. ISSN 1050-3293.

[2] Gastil, John (2000). "Is face-to-face citizen deliberation a luxury or a necessity?". Political Communication. 17 (4): 357–361. doi:10.1080/10584600050178960.

[3] Schudson, Michael (1997). "Why conversation is not the soul of democracy". Critical Studies in Mass Communication. 14 (4): 297–309. doi:10.1080/15295039709367020.

[4] S., Fishkin, James (1991). Democracy and deliberation : new directions for democratic reform. New Haven: Yale University Press. ISBN 9780300051636. OCLC 24067411.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

[:1-5] Cite error: The named reference :1 was invoked but never defined (see the help page).

[6] Jürgen, Habermas (January 1989). The structural transformation of the public sphere : an inquiry into a category of bourgeois society. Cambridge, Mass. ISBN 9780262081801. OCLC 18327374.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)

[:3-7] Stroud, Natalie Jomini; Scacco, Joshua M.; Muddiman, Ashley; Curry, Alexander L. (2015-03-01). "Changing Deliberative Norms on News Organizations' Facebook Sites". Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 20 (2): 188–203. doi:10.1111/jcc4.12104.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]