Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

36 results

Page 1 of 2

  • 15 - Deliberation

  • from Part II - Modalities
  • Edited by Richard Bellamy, University College London, Jeff King, University College London
  • Book:
    The Cambridge Handbook of Constitutional Theory
    Published online:
    27 March 2025
    Print publication:
    24 April 2025, pp 246-261

  • Summary

    This paper discusses the various ways that deliberative democratic theory intervenes in debates about constitutional theory. After a brief introduction, Section II begins with foundational views that employ deliberation as a framework to reconstruct constitutionalism as such. In Section III I canvas theories that delineating how we ought to be deliberating about constitutions within established liberal democratic orders. This moves the discussion from a constituent function of deliberation to a constituted function and role. This section pays special attention to public reason arguments. The question of how we should be deliberating about constitutional essentials naturally leads to the question of who should be deliberating about constitutional essentials in Section IV. There are three natural answers to this question: courts, legislatures, and citizens. Within deliberative democracy theory the answer is often a combination of these three but there are important variations. In Section V, I take a deeper dive into citizen participation in deliberative constitutionalism. I argue that deliberative constitutionalism offers a view of democratic constitutionalism that differs from political and popular constitutionalism both of which are focused on reducing the power of courts vis-à-vis legislative institutions rather than enhancing the participatory power of citizens.

  • Navigating Pluralism: Beiner on Habermas

  • Simone Chambers
  • Journal:
    The Review of Politics / Volume 78 / Issue 2 / Spring 2016
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    14 April 2016, pp. 299-302

  • One of the hazards in writing a book that surveys a large number of thinkers is that readers are likely to praise the book in general but take issue with the chapter that treads into their bailiwick. I am no exception as I will focus on Beiner's chapter on Habermas. I conclude, however, with some general observations about Beiner's idea and ideal of political philosophy. I offer this response in the same spirit in which Beiner wrote the book. He tells his reader that to hold back from the very toughest challenge is a form of condescension (xi). So I will not hold back.

Dissent on Core Beliefs
  • Religious and Secular Perspectives
  • Edited by Simone Chambers, Peter Nosco
  • Published online:
    05 May 2015
    Print publication:
    23 April 2015
  • Difference, diversity and disagreement are inevitable features of our ethical, social and political landscape. This collection of new essays investigates the ways that various ethical and religious traditions have dealt with intramural dissent; the volume covers nine separate traditions: Confucianism, Buddhism, Christianity, Judaism, Islam, liberalism, Marxism, South Asian religions and natural law. Each chapter lays out the distinctive features, history and challenges of intramural dissent within each tradition, enabling readers to identify similarities and differences between traditions. The book concludes with an Afterword by Michael Walzer, offering a synoptic overview of the challenge of intramural dissent and the responses to that challenge. Committed to dialogue across cultures and traditions, the collection begins that dialogue with the common challenges facing all traditions: how to maintain cohesion and core values in the face of pluralism, and how to do this in a way that is consistent with the internal ethical principles of the traditions.

Page 1 of 2