Advocates of ?deliberative democracy? want citizens to actively participate in serious dialogue over political issues, not merely go to the polls every few years. Unfortunately, these ideals don't take into account widespread political ignorance and irrationality. Most voters neither attain the level of knowledge needed to make deliberative democracy work, nor do they rationally evaluate the political information they do possess. The vast size and complexity of modern government make it unlikely that most citizens can ever reach the levels of (...) knowledge and rationality required by deliberative democracy, even if they were better informed than they are at present. (shrink)

In the ongoing debate about the impact that studies of public ignorance should have on the study of culture, Mark Fenster and Bret Chandler assume that wider political participation must be our goal, because, to them, political ignorance is a culturally imposed, and therefore removable, obstacle—as if, without the baleful influence of culture, political participants would be well informed. Culture is indeed a primary influence on people's political opinions, so political scientists should indeed study the role it plays in the (...) formation of political beliefs. But such studies should begin with ignorance as people's default position, and should refrain from assuming that the source of ignorance is cultural domination or manipulation. (shrink)

This article draws on results from a long-term research program carried out by the Science Centre Berlin for Social Research (WZB) and the Swedish Collegium of Advanced Study in the Social Sciences (SCASSS) on the history and sociology of the social sciences. The transformations of the discourses on society is outlined in the three major periods of transformations that have occurred in the age of modernity in Europe since the late 18th century. These three transformations have all involved a fundamental (...) restructuring of the key political, economic and discursive institutions. The article outlines these institutional transformation and their mutual linkages and social embeddedness with special reference to problems of societal knowledge, technology and identity. (shrink)

Es sabido que Levinas pasa por ser uno de los primeros y mejores intérpretes de la obra de Husserl y tampoco nadie duda ya, a estas alturas de la investigación, de la decisiva mediación histórica que significó para la naciente fenomenología francesa la labor pionera de nuestro joven autor. Filósofos como Sartre, Ricoeur o Henry no se podrían entender completamente sin el concurso de la obra más temprana de Levinas. La tesis principal que ha vertebrado mi exposición defiende que una (...) parte considerable de la carrera intelectual de nuestro autor -la desarrollada concretamente en los años anteriores a la Shoah- debe ser comprendida como una meditación de la filosofía de Husserl y lo que es aún más importante, que el original tratamiento que nuestro autor irá otorgando con posterioridad a la misma no supone, de hecho, sino su prolongación más allá, incluso, de los límites precisos que el propio fundador de la fenomenología llegara tal vez a prever para ella. La hipótesis de la que he partido es que nos hallamos ante una influencia que supera la mera referencia instrumental a Husserl para convertirse en una de las claves más determinantes y permanentes en la filosofía de Levinas. La contribución principal de mi tesis consiste en haber mostrado ese carácter peculiar y dinámico con el que Levinas fue asimilando la doctrina fenomenológica al tiempo que comenzaban ya a barruntarse en él muchas de las preocupaciones más acuciantes de su posterior filosofía. -/- . (shrink)

O objetivo desse artigo é o de levantar algumas possibilidades de se utilizar o aporte fenomenológico para a constituição de uma nova ontologia para a Arquitetura e o Urbanismo que priorize no projeto, seja da cidade seja de uma edificação qualquer, o habitar e o sentido do lugar, num diálogo com a Filosofia. O princípio que orienta a discussão é de que hoje, como a maioria dos habitantes da Terra é urbana, nosso ser-no-mundo se consubstancia como ser-na-cidade. Essa maneira contemporânea (...) de ser pode ser observada, por exemplo, nas cidades médias e pequenas de uma urbanização dispersa, que desafia as utopias e os ideais e arquitetônicos e urbanísticos do século XIX e do século XX, colocando o desafio de se projetar segundo a imageabilidade, as marcas e matrizes paisagísticas, oferecidas por toda uma produção vernacular, esta sim, alheia aos ditames da geometria e da quantificação, e voltada para o mundo vivido. (shrink)

El artículo estudia la epistemología o los fundamentos de la interpretación. Tradicionalmente se han enfrentado dos: las que interpretan analíticamente usando conceptos, ideas y palabras, y las que lo hacen desde la vida y señalan que la palabra limita la comprensión de ciertas realidades. Mauricio Beuchot defiende unpunto intermedio a partir de la analogía. Sin embargo, se argumenta que esta interpretación se encuentra en del marco analítico y, más allá de ella, es posible realizar un abordaje experiencial de la analogía. (...) Esta aproximación inaugura un modelo de interpretación que integra las dos concepciones de la epistemología mencionadas. (shrink)

ABSTRACTIn Democratic Reason, Hélène Landemore argues that deliberation and the aggregation of citizens' dispersed knowledge should tend to produce better consequences than rule by the one or the few. However, she pays insufficient attention to the epistemic processes necessary to realize these democratic goods. In particular, she fails to consider the question of where citizens' beliefs and ideas come from, with the result that the democratic decision mechanisms she focuses on are insufficiently powerful to justify her consequentialist defense of mass (...) decision making. If “the few” are technocratic experts, Landemore supplies little reason to resist their rule on epistemic grounds, for she does not secure a knowledge base for the citizens that might compete with the knowledge that is often attributed to such “experts.” Aggregating and deliberating about poor information is no substitute for good information. Her book can therefore be seen as a call for a new phase of epistemic political theory that compares the real-world knowledgeability of ordinary citizens and putative experts, but it does not convincingly deliver on its goal to demonstrate the epistemic superiority of the former. (shrink)

ABSTRACTJack Knight and James Johnson argue in The Priority of Democracy that democracy should be theorized and justified pragmatically: Democratic deliberations should be given a central coordinating role in society not because they realize any particular abstract ideal, but because they would elicit the information needed to solve real-world problems. However, Knight and Johnson rely on a naïve economic understanding of knowledge that assumes implausibly that individuals know what they need to know and need only aggregate thier separate beliefs. It (...) is precisely because we may not know what we need to know that we need to continually test our ideas. Contra Knight and Johnson, moreover, we ought to accept that our ability to interpret social experiments properly is questionable. A pragmatic approach to social inquiry, therefore, ought to investigate what beliefs political actors actually bring to collective decisions rather than how theoretically perfect beliefs ought to be elicited and aggregated. (shrink)