Document Type
Article
Publication Date
3-2023
Journal Title
Argumentation
ISSN
0920-427X
DOI
10.1007/s10503-023-09598-6
Abstract
Argumentation as the public exchange of reasons is widely thought to enhance deliberative interactions that generate and justify reasonable public policies. Adopting an argumentation-theoretic perspective, we survey the norms that should govern public argumentation and address some of the complexities that scholarly treatments have identified. Our focus is on norms associated with the ideals of correctness and participation as sources of a politically legitimate deliberative outcome. In principle, both ideals are mutually coherent. If the information needed for a correct deliberative outcome is distributed among agents, then maximising participation increases information diversity. But both ideals can also be in tension. If participants lack competence or are prone to biases, a correct deliberative outcome requires limiting participation. The central question for public argumentation, therefore, is how to strike a balance between both ideals. Rather than advocating a preferred normative framework, our main purpose is to illustrate the complexity of this theme.
First Page
1
Last Page
34
Num Pages
34
Publisher
Springer
Recommended Citation
Zenker, F., van Laar, J.A., Cepollaro, B. et al. Norms of Public Argumentation and the Ideals of Correctness and Participation. Argumentation (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-023-09598-6
File Type
Included in
Interpersonal and Small Group Communication Commons, Legal Education Commons, Legal Writing and Research Commons, Other Communication Commons