This article argues that in order to foster democratic deliberation, adversarial debates should be promoted rather than discussion. Discussion, in which participants talk to and answer each other, can have detrimental consequences, even when it is strictly argumentative. The article analyses the psychological and social mechanisms that can lead to such undesirable results. The worth of democratic deliberation comes from the exchange of arguments for and against a certain course of action, and the weighting of the opposing reasons. The article thus defends a different perspective on democratic deliberation than the dominant one.
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Sociology and Political Science
- Political Science and International Relations