英文摘要 |
In a liberal democratic society, citizens frequently disagree about various social institutions and public policies. The problem of stability presents a challenge for every contemporary pluralist society. The problem we are faced with is how citizens can be motivated to accept and comply with institutions and policies voluntarily, even if they affirm different conceptions of morality and good. The purpose of this essay is to formulate how and to what extent the conception of deliberative democracy proposed by Amy Gutmann and Dennis Thompson can secure the stability of a pluralist society. I will point out that public deliberation can produce a brainstorming effect, transform individuals’ preferences from private interests to public interests, promote mutual respect between citizens, and confer legitimacy on the results of policy-making. These effects can mitigate political disagreement and make citizens more willing to support or comply with the ultimate results. Moreover, Gutmann and Thompson argue that the deliberative process is dynamic, which is also conducive to stability. However, their theory lacks practical mechanisms, and such mechanisms should be offered as supplements in order to realize the stabilizing functions of public deliberation. |