Intersubjective reasoning and the formation of metaconsensus

Research output: A Conference proceeding or a Chapter in BookChapter

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
EditorsJohn Yearwood, Andrew Stranieri
PublisherIGI Global
Chapter2
Pages18-37
Number of pages20
ISBN (Electronic)9781609600938
ISBN (Print)9781609600914
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Dec 2010
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

deliberation
rationality
appeal
Specifications
Values
Group

Cite this

Niemeyer, S. (2010). Intersubjective reasoning and the formation of metaconsensus. In J. Yearwood, & A. Stranieri (Eds.), Technologies for Supporting Reasoning Communities and Collaborative Decision Making: Cooperative Approaches (pp. 18-37). IGI Global. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60960-091-4.ch002
Niemeyer, Simon. / Intersubjective reasoning and the formation of metaconsensus. Technologies for Supporting Reasoning Communities and Collaborative Decision Making: Cooperative Approaches. editor / John Yearwood ; Andrew Stranieri. IGI Global, 2010. pp. 18-37
@inbook{fe2c4805cf6d417cb6e0bd035596bdfb,
title = "Intersubjective reasoning and the formation of metaconsensus",
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.",
author = "Simon Niemeyer",
year = "2010",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.4018/978-1-60960-091-4.ch002",
language = "English",
isbn = "9781609600914",
pages = "18--37",
editor = "John Yearwood and Andrew Stranieri",
booktitle = "Technologies for Supporting Reasoning Communities and Collaborative Decision Making",
publisher = "IGI Global",

}

Niemeyer, S 2010, Intersubjective reasoning and the formation of metaconsensus. in J Yearwood & A Stranieri (eds), Technologies for Supporting Reasoning Communities and Collaborative Decision Making: Cooperative Approaches. IGI Global, pp. 18-37. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60960-091-4.ch002

Intersubjective reasoning and the formation of metaconsensus. / Niemeyer, Simon.

Technologies for Supporting Reasoning Communities and Collaborative Decision Making: Cooperative Approaches. ed. / John Yearwood; Andrew Stranieri. IGI Global, 2010. p. 18-37.

Research output: A Conference proceeding or a Chapter in BookChapter

TY - CHAP

T1 - Intersubjective reasoning and the formation of metaconsensus

AU - Niemeyer, Simon

PY - 2010/12/1

Y1 - 2010/12/1

N2 - 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.

AB - 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.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84900571338&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4018/978-1-60960-091-4.ch002

DO - 10.4018/978-1-60960-091-4.ch002

M3 - Chapter

SN - 9781609600914

SP - 18

EP - 37

BT - Technologies for Supporting Reasoning Communities and Collaborative Decision Making

A2 - Yearwood, John

A2 - Stranieri, Andrew

PB - IGI Global

ER -

Niemeyer S. Intersubjective reasoning and the formation of metaconsensus. In Yearwood J, Stranieri A, editors, Technologies for Supporting Reasoning Communities and Collaborative Decision Making: Cooperative Approaches. IGI Global. 2010. p. 18-37 https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60960-091-4.ch002