Deliberation Technology

From P2P Foundation
Jump to: navigation, search

* Article: Damien S. Pfister and Getachew Dinku Godana (2012) "Deliberation Technology," Journal of Public Deliberation: Vol. 8: No. 1, Article 10.


URL = http://services.bepress.com/jpd/vol8/iss1/art10


Abstract

"In this Introduction to the Symposium, we articulate a reframing of Larry Diamond's (2010) program of "liberation technology" around the idea of "deliberation technology." Although the liberation technology program has been useful in supplying dissidents with a basic communication infrastructure during the various revolutions of the 2011 Arab Spring, we briefly examine the cases of Tunisia and Egypt in order to show how deliberative vacuums have arisen after regime change. We then introduce each of the four Symposium submissions with the hopes that a program of deliberation technology might contribute to the strengthening of democratic practice around the world."


More Information

see also:

* Article: Tim van Gelder (2012) "Cultivating Deliberation for Democracy," Journal of Public Deliberation: Vol. 8: No. 1, Article 12.

URL = http://services.bepress.com/jpd/vol8/iss1/art12

"Diamond's Liberation Technology describes how new communication technologies can help bring about democracy, but not how they can help improve an existing democracy. One natural idea is that technologies developed specifically for improving deliberation might help improve in quantity and quality the public deliberation required for a healthy democracy. To date, this has failed to happen; deliberation technologies have not been taken up by the public to any significant degree. I suggest that this is because such technologies have taken the wrong approach, imposing too much structure on deliberative discourse. An alternative is to "cultivate" better deliberation. This approach is taken by YourView, a new kind of virtual forum, which aims to enhance democracy by providing an opportunity for citizens easily access key arguments on major issues, take a stand on those issues, and help shape the "collective wisdom" - the considered collective view. By identifying when participants exhibit "epistemic virtues," and rewarding such behaviors, it encourages rather than imposes better-quality deliberation."