Deliberation, cognitive diversity, and democratic inclusiveness: an epistemic argument for the random selection of representatives

  title={Deliberation, cognitive diversity, and democratic inclusiveness: an epistemic argument for the random selection of representatives},
  author={H{\'e}l{\`e}ne Landemore},
This paper argues in favor of the epistemic properties of inclusiveness in the context of democratic deliberative assemblies and derives the implications of this argument in terms of the epistemically superior mode of selection of representatives. The paper makes the general case that, all other things being equal and under some reasonable assumptions, more is smarter. When applied to deliberative assemblies of representatives, where there is an upper limit to the number of people that can be… Expand
Inclusion and the Epistemic Benefits of Deliberation
Contrary to the popular belief, I argue that a more inclusive polity does not necessarily conflict with the goal of improving the epistemic capacities of deliberation. My argument examines oneExpand
Why the Many Are Smarter than the Few and Why It Matters
This paper presents the foundations of a systematic epistemic case for democracy as a collective decision-rule and explores the implications of this epistemic claim for normative justifications ofExpand
Beyond the Fact of Disagreement? The Epistemic Turn in Deliberative Democracy
Abstract This paper takes stock of a recent but growing movement within the field of deliberative democracy, which normatively argues for the epistemic dimension of democratic authority andExpand
The epistemic value of deliberative democracy: how far can diversity take us?
This paper contributes to growing debates over the decision-making ability of democracy by considering the epistemic value of deliberative democracy. It focuses on the benefits democraticExpand
On Minimal Deliberation, Partisan Activism, and Teaching People How to Disagree
ABSTRACT Mutz argues that there is an inverse correlation between deliberation and participation. However, the validity of this conclusion partly depends on how one defines deliberation andExpand
Democratic Public Justification
Abstract Democratic institutions are appealing means of making publicly justified social choices. By allowing participation by all citizens, democracy can accommodate diversity among citizens, and byExpand
Thinking Sortition : Modes of selection, deliberative frameworks and democratic principles
The abstract democratic ideal is hegemonic nowadays, but, what is considered to be its concrete institutional forms are facing a growing “crisis of representation” and distrust. As an answer to thisExpand
The Role and the Future of Deliberative Mini-publics: A Citizen Perspective
The last decades have witnessed a spread of democratic innovations. Chief among them are deliberative mini-publics that gather randomly selected citizens to discuss salient public issues with the aimExpand
Taking the Goals of Deliberation Seriously: A Differentiated View on Equality and Equity in Deliberative Designs and Processes
Deliberation must be immunized against coercive power by a baseline of equality. But what does the requirement of equality mean, in practice, for organizers designing deliberative events and forums?Expand
Democracy as Heuristic: The Ecological Rationality of Political Equality
In this paper, Landemore explores one defense of political equality: that uncertainty about the nature of the political questions a polity will face require not only maximal inclusion but alsoExpand


Deliberative Democracy and the Epistemic Benefits of Diversity
ABSTRACT It is often assumed that democracies can make good use of the epistemic benefits of diversity among their citizenry, but difficult to show why this is the case. In a deliberative democracy,Expand
Democratic Reason: The Mechanisms of Collective Intelligence in Politics
This paper argues that democracy can be seen as a way to channel “democratic reason,” or the collective political intelligence of the many. The paper hypothesizes that two main democratic mechanismsExpand
Reasoning is for Arguing: Understanding the Successes and Failures of Deliberation
Theoreticians of deliberative democracy have sometimes found it hard to relate to the seemingly contradictory experimental results produced by psychologists and political scientists. We suggest thatExpand
Epistemic aspects of representative government
The Federalist, justifying the Electoral College to elect the president, claimed that a small group of more informed individuals would make a better decision than the general mass. But the CondorcetExpand
Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism
Abstract: This article examines the current debate about the nature of democracy and discusses the main theses of the approach called 'deliberative democracy' in its two main versions, the one putExpand
The Place of Self-Interest and the Role of Power in the Deliberative Democracy
DELIBERATIVE democracy has traditionally been defined in opposition to self-interest, to bargaining and negotiation, to voting, and to the use of power. Our assessment differs in two ways from theExpand
Deliberative and Non-Deliberative Negotiations
Theorists in all three major branches of deliberative theory have traditionally excluded from the concept of deliberation simple convergence to an outcome as well as any form of negotiation. In aExpand
The Logic of Random Selection
This essay lays out the common reasoning underlying a diversity of arguments for decision making using lotteries. This reasoning appeals to the sanitizing effects of ignorance. Lotteries ensure thatExpand
Deliberative Polling as the Gold Standard
The Deliberative Polls of James Fishkin and Robert Luskin represent today the gold standard of attempts to sample what a considered public opinion might be on issues of political importance. 1 ThoseExpand
Why do humans reason? Arguments for an argumentative theory
The hypothesis is that the function of reasoning is argumentative: It is to devise and evaluate arguments intended to persuade and is adaptive given the exceptional dependence of humans on communication and their vulnerability to misinformation. Expand