Political Freedom in a Deliberative System
A Republican Case Against Holistic Evaluations
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 22286152 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Donald Bello Hutt (0000-0003-2979-6631, Department of Philosophy, University of Valladolid; Institute of Philosopy, KU Leuven) |
| Year | 2021 |
| Volume | 107 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 167-184 |
| Publication date | 2021-01-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Archiv für Rechts- und Wirtschaftsphilosophie (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0177-1108 • E-ISSN: 2363-5606 |
| Publisher | Wissenschaftliche Verlagsgesellschaft mbH (PUBLISHER • DE) |
| DOI | 10.25162/arsp-2021-0009 |
| OpenAlex | W3116112328 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
Champions of systemic approaches to deliberative democratic theory consider that deliberative systems serve sundry functions. Whether guaranteeing political freedom should be one of those functions has not been explored in the scholarly literature. This article thus examines which conceptions of freedom underpin systemic approaches to deliberative democracy. I explore and circumscribe the analysis to two prominent options: freedom as absence of interference and freedom as non-domination. The answer to which of these alternatives best serves as a function of the deliberative system hinges on the previous question of whether holistic evaluations of systemic deliberative performance are to be endorsed. The article then argues that holistic evaluations are only compatible with freedom as non-interference. By contrast, freedom as non-domination is incompatible with holism. I then provide reasons for endorsing freedom as non-domination and, by implication, to reject holistic systemic evaluations
Deliberative democracy · Democracy · Epistemology · Holism · Law and economics · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Law · Philosophy · Social Media and Politics
| Citations per year | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2025 - 2025 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |