Intersubjective reasoning and the formation of metaconsensus

Simon Niemeyer*

*Corresponding author for this work

    Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapterpeer-review

    1 Citation (Scopus)

    Abstract

    Group deliberation, according to deliberative theorists, is supposed to produce better outcomes, but there is relatively little specification on the nature of improvement beyond appeals to consensus and improved reasoning. This chapter identifies two inter-related concepts of metaconsensus and intersubjective rationality as outcomes that an authentic deliberative process ought to produce. Importantly, these deliberative ends are consistent with ideal deliberative procedure. They are also empirically tractable, where preference transformation can be described in terms of underlying values, and judgments. Methods for assessing deliberative ends are provided and demonstrated using the Bloomfield Track case study.

    Original languageEnglish
    Title of host publicationTechnologies for Supporting Reasoning Communities and Collaborative Decision Making
    Subtitle of host publicationCooperative Approaches
    PublisherIGI Global
    Pages18-37
    Number of pages20
    ISBN (Print)9781609600914
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2010

    Fingerprint

    Dive into the research topics of 'Intersubjective reasoning and the formation of metaconsensus'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this