Course Description:

This course examines the democratic theory paradigm known as “deliberative democracy” with a special focus within it on the connection between the idea of democracy and the ideal and practice of deliberation. Deliberation is not by itself democratic. Further, it is questionable whether good deliberation can be properly “democratic,” at least if democracy involves strict equality of opinions. One of the aims of the seminar, beyond exposing the students to classics in the deliberative democracy literature, will thus be to specify what is meant, exactly, by “democratic deliberation,” what its characteristics are, on what topics it can be properly conducted, and under which condition it can be expected to produce good results. The seminar generally aims to go beyond the classical opposition between proponents of deliberative democracy and advocates of aggregative democracy, that is, beyond the opposition between deliberation and voting. It also aims to go beyond the opposition between procedure and substance, that is, the opposition between questions pertaining to the fairness of the deliberative process and questions pertaining to the quality of its outcomes. The seminar will also examine the role of representative institutions in enabling democratic deliberation in large polities, as well as the impact of new technologies on deliberation in the public sphere. We will also question the meaning and democratic nature of the “public” in the idea of “public reason,” “public sphere,” or “public debates.” 

Grade policy and expectations for the course: 

Each student will be expected to be responsible for introducing and briefly discussing the readings for one week. You need to sign up for at least one such presentation.

Final grades will be based on:

• in-class participation, which includes the oral presentation just specified (5%)

•  several short Wikipedia assignments culminating in the writing or rewriting of a Wikipedia article related to the topic of the class. The Wikipedia assignments will start as early as week 2 and I will provide guidance throughout the semester (30%). 

• a short response paper analyzing your Wikipedia experience (5%);

• and finally an original 25-page research paper on the topic of the Wikipedia article you will have worked on (50%). 

The final analytical paper will be due during reading period at the end of the semester. It is meant to go beyond your Wikipedia article and allow you to advance your own ideas, arguments, and original research about your topic.

Instead of the 25-page research paper, authorized undergraduate students are expected to write a 12-page research paper due at the end of term. 

Useful resource in relation to the Wikipedia assignment:

We will benefit throughout the semester from the generous help of Adam Hyland, a volunteer at the Wikimedia foundation. He is available to help you choose articles to work on or for questions about editing through the term. You can reach him a adam@wiki.edu Please keep in mind that he is a volunteer and his time is precious so try not to flood his mailbox with overly simple questions.

Assigned Readings and Course Schedule: 

Most of the readings will be posted online. I however suggest that you buy the following edited volume, which contains many of the essays on the reading list: Bohman, James and William Rehg. Deliberative Democracy: Essays on Reason and Politics. Cambridge, M.I.T Press: 1997.

♠

Week 1: January 20

Introduction (no readings) 

Assignment (due next week): 

• Please enroll at: https://dashboard.wikiedu.org/courses/Yale_University/Deliberative_Democracy_and_Beyond_(Spring_2016)?enroll=jwseonhl

•  Create a Wikipedia account and complete the online training for students. Create a User page. Introduce yourself to another student on their user talk page. Come prepared to discuss some of your observations about Wikipedia articles in a topic area of interest that are missing or could use improvement.

♠

Week 2: January 27

Foundational Texts in Deliberative Democracy

• Elster, Jon. “The Market and the Forum: Three Varieties of Political Theory”

• Habermas, Jürgen. “Popular Sovereignty as Procedure”

• Cohen, Joshua. “Deliberation and Democratic Legitimacy”

• Rawls, John. “The Idea of Public Reason”

Assignment (due next week): Be prepared to explain close paraphrasing, plagiarism, and copyright violations on Wikipedia.

♠

Week 3: February 3

Deliberation and Public Justification

• John Rawls, “The Idea of an Overlapping Consensus”

• John Rawls, “The Idea of Public Reason Revisited”

• Habermas, Jürgen, “Deliberative Politics: A Procedural Concept of Democracy” (Chapter 7 of Between Facts and Norms)

Assignment (due next week): Add 1-2 sentences of new information, backed up with a citation to an appropriate source, to a Wikipedia article related to the class. Research and list 3-5 articles on your Wikipedia user page that you will consider working on as your main project. Look at the talk page for existing topics for a sense of who else is working on it and what they are doing. Describe your choice to me for feedback.

♠

Week 4: February 10

Definitions of Deliberation and Empirical Applications

• Habermas, Jürgen, “Political communication in the media society: does democracy still enjoy an epistemic dimension? The impact of normative theory on empirical research", Communication Theory, 16, 2006

• Jane Mansbridge et alii, “The Place of Self-interest and the Role of Power in Deliberative Democracy,” The Journal of Political Philosophy 2010

• C. Karpowitz and T. Mendelberg, "An Experimental Approach to Citizen Deliberation", In Cambridge Handbook of Experimental Political Science, 2011.

• J. Goeree and L. Yariv, "An Experimental Study of Collective Deliberation,” Econometrica, May 2011, Volume 79, Issue 3, pages 893–921

• Aitamurto, Tanja and Hélène Landemore. “Crowdsourced Deliberation: The Case of an Off-Traffic Law Reform in Finland” (with Tanja Aitamurto) Policy & Internet

Assignment: If you are starting a new article, write a 3-4 paragraph summary version of your article—with citations—in your Wikipedia sandbox. If you are improving an existing article, create a detailed outline reflecting your proposed changes, and post this for community feedback, along with a brief description of your plans, on the article’s talk page. Make sure to check back on the talk page often and engage with any responses.

Begin working with classmates and other editors to polish your short starter article and fix any major issues. 

♠

Week 5: February 17

The Epistemic Turn in Deliberative Democracy

• Joshua Cohen, “An Epistemic Conception of Democracy”

• David Estlund, “Beyond Fairness and Deliberation: The Epistemic Dimension of Democratic Authority,” in Bohman and Regh

• Hélène Landemore, Democratic Reason: Politics, Collective Intelligence and the Rule of the many, Chapter 1, 4, 8.

Assignment: Continue research in preparation for expanding your article. Come prepared to discuss Wikipedia culture and etiquette

♠

Week 6: February 24

Screening of the film “12 Angry Men” by Sidney Lumet

Optional reading: Scott Page, The Difference, Chapter Six

Assignment: Move your sandbox articles into main space. 

• If you are expanding an existing article, copy your edit into the article. If you are making many small edits, save after each edit before you make the next one. Do NOT paste over the entire existing article, or large sections of the existing article.

• If you are creating a new article, do NOT copy and paste your text, or there will be no record of your work history. Follow the instructions in the “Moving out of your sandbox” handout.

• Begin expanding your article into a comprehensive treatment of the topic.

♠

Week 7: March 2

The Psychology of Deliberation 

• Daniel Kahneman, “Perspectives on Judgment and Choice”

• Tali Mendelberg, “The Deliberative Citizen: Theory and Evidence”

• Gerry Mackie, “Does Democratic Deliberation Change Minds?” Politics, Philosophy & Economics, 5(3): 279.

• Cass Sunstein. “The Law of Group Polarization,” in Fishkin and Laslett (eds), Debating Deliberative Democracy

• Hélène Landemore, Democratic Reason, Chapter 5.

Assignment: Choose articles to peer-review. Select a classmates’ article that you will peer review and copy edit. On the table at the bottom of the course page, add your username next to the article you will peer review. (You don’t need to start peer reviewing yet.)

♠

Week 8: March 9 

Deliberative Democracy and Representation

• N. Urbinati, M. Warren, "The concept of representation in contemporary political theory", Annual Review of Political Science, June 2008, Vol. 11, pp.387-412

• Michael Saward, "Authorization and authenticity. Representation and the unelected", Journal of Political Philosophy, 2009, vol. 17 (1):1-22

• Jane Mansbridge, “Rethinking Representation,” APSR.

• Jane Mansbridge, “Should Blacks Represent Blacks, and Women Represent Women? A Contingent Yes” Journal of Political Philosophy

• Andrew Rehfeld. “Representation Rethought” APSR

Assignment: Expand your article into a first draft.

♠

Spring break (March 11-28)

♠

Week 9:  March 30

Deliberation (and Representation) in Mini-Publics

• M. Brown, "Survey article: citizens' panels and the concept of

• representation", Journal of Political Philosophy, June 2006, Volume 14, Issue 2, pp. 203–225

• R. Luskin, J. Fishkin, and R. Jowell, “Considered Opinions: Deliberative Polling in Britain,” British Journal of Political Science, July 2002, 32(3): 455-487

• B. Goodin, "Making use of mini-publics", in B. Goodin, Innovating Democracy, Oxford U.P., 2008, ch. 2

• S. Chambers, "Rhetoric and the public sphere: has deliberation abandoned mass democracy?", Political Theory, June 2009, vol. 37 no. 3, pp. 323-350

• Cristina Lafont, “Deliberation, Participation, and Democratic Legitimacy: Should Deliberative Mini-Publics Shape Public Policy?” Journal of Political Philosophy, 23/1 (2015), 40-63.

Assignment (due next week):

• Peer review of your classmates’ articles. Leave suggestions on the article talk pages

• Copy-edit the two reviewed articles

♠

Week 10: April 6

Critics I: Realists and Agonistic Democrats

• Ian Shapiro. “Enough of Deliberation: Politics is About Power and Interests,” in Stephen Macedo (ed), Deliberative Politics: Essays on Democracy and Disagreement

• Chantal Mouffe, “Deliberative Democracy or Agonistic Pluralism”

• Lynn Sanders, “Against Deliberation”

• Adam Przeworski. “Deliberation and Ideological Domination,” in Elster

Assignment: Make edits to your article based on peers’ feedback. If you disagree with a suggestion, use talk pages to politely discuss and come to a consensus on your edit.

♠

Week 11: April 13

Critics II: Aggregative Democrats and Critics of Epistemic Democracy

• David Miller, “Deliberative democracy and social choice,” in Fishkin and Laslett

• Christian List and John Dryzeck: “Social Choice Theory and Deliberative Democracy: A Reconciliation”

• Christian List “The Discursive Dilemma and Public Reason”

• Urbinati and Saffron “Procedural Democracy, the Bulwark of Political Equality”

• Sean Ingham, “Disagreement and Epistemic Arguments for Democracy,” Politics, Philosophy & Economics 12(2) (May, 2013): 135-154.

Assignment (due next class): Prepare for an in-class presentation about your Wikipedia editing experience (half the class)

♠

Week 12: April 20

Deliberation and consensus

• Dryzek, John. “Reconciling Pluralism and Consensus.” American Journal of Political Science 50

• Niemeyer S and Dryzek J. 2007. “The Ends of Deliberation: Meta-consensus and Inter-subjective Rationality as Ideal Outcomes.” Swiss Political Science Review 13(4): 497-526.

• Rae D (1975) “The Limits of Consensual Decision.” American Political Science Review 69(4): 1270-1294. 

• Steiner, Jürg, and Robert H. Dorff. 1980. “Decision by Interpretation: A New Concept for an Often Overlooked Decision Mode.” British Journal of Political Science 11(1): 1-13

• Hélène Landemore and Scott E. Page, “Deliberation and Disagreement: Problem-Solving, Prediction, and Positive Dissensus.” Politics, Philosophy, and Economics.

Assignment: 

• Add final touches to your Wikipedia article

• Write a reflective essay (2-5 pages) on your Wikipedia contributions)

• Prepare for an in-class presentation about your Wikipedia editing experience (other half of the class)

♠

Week 13: April 27

Deliberation at scale and conclusions

• John Parkinson and Jane Mansbridge, Deliberative Systems: Deliberative Democracy at the Large Scale. Cambridge University Press 2012. Selection

• Niemeyer et al. “Achieving Success in Large Scale Deliberation: An Analysis of the Fremantle Bridge Community Engagement.”

May 11: Final analytical research papers due.