Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Rationality and deliberative democracy: A constructive critique of John Dryzek's democratic theory

  • Article
  • Published:
Contemporary Political Theory Aims and scope

Abstract

John Dryzek's justification of deliberative democracy rests on a critique of instrumental rationality and a defence of Habermas's idea of communicative rationality. I question each stage of Dryzek's theory. It defines instrumental rationality broadly but only criticises narrow applications of it. It conflates communicative rationality with Habermas's idea of ‘discourse’ – the real motor of Dryzek's democratic theory. Deliberative democracy can be better defended by avoiding overstated criticisms of instrumental rationality, by altering the emphasis on communicative rationality, and by focusing more on different models of politics than different models of rationality. Dryzek's theory can thus present deliberative democracy as a better means to better ends – a more powerful and more positive position.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Dryzek (1992, pp. 406–407). See also Dryzek (1987, pp. 200–205; 1990a, pp. 3–21; 1992, pp. 400–401, 406–409; 1994, pp. 160–165; 1995, pp. 111–115; 1998, pp. 589–590; 2000, pp. 21–22).

  2. Dryzek (1992, p. 400; 1996, p. 93; 1997, p. 164; 1998, p. 589; 2000, p. 22; 2006a, p. 113). For slightly different definitions, see Dryzek (1987, p. 200; 1990a, pp. 3–4; 1994, p. 172).

  3. TCA1, pp. 9, 11, 15, 17, 22, 115–116; PMT, p. 102; OPC, pp. 188, 220, 312; JA, pp. 52–53; BFN, pp. 119–120; TJ, pp. 94–95; see also Chambers (1996, pp. 90–91, 101, 119, 132–133). (See above for abbreviations of Habermas's works.)

  4. CES, pp. 1–5, 65–68; TCA1, pp. 38–39, 99–104, 285–287, 295–309; TCA2, pp. 120–126; MCCA, pp. 58, 133–137; AR, pp. 241–242, 291; JA, p. 81; OPC, pp. 217–222, 293–301, 315–329.

  5. Dryzek (1990a, pp. 14–15; 1992, pp. 406–407; 1994, p. 165; 1996, pp. 107–108; 1998, p. 589; 2000, pp. 21–22; 2006b, p. 196).

  6. Dryzek (1990a, pp. 14–15; 1993, p. 228; 1994, p. 165; 1996, pp. 107–108; 2000, p. 22; 2006b, p. 196). Note that Dryzek talks of autonomy differently (2006a, p. 85).

  7. Dryzek (1990a, p. 15; 1992, pp. 406–409; 1996, p. 146; 2000, pp. 1–2, 21; 2006a, pp. 84–87, 113–115).

  8. Dryzek (1987, p. 212; 1990a, p. 54; 1992, pp. 401, 408–411; 2000, p. 169).

  9. Dryzek (1990a, p. 15, 72–73; 1993, p. 228–229).

  10. CES, pp. 3–4; TCA1, pp. 15–16, 88. I use ‘norm’ more loosely and broadly than Habermas, who talks also of value orientations, rules, institutions, conventions, habits and practices (TJ, p. 103).

  11. TP, pp. 18–19; CES, pp. 4, 64, 209; TCA1, pp. 17–20, 42, 334; MCCA, pp. 59, 65–68, 86–94, 201–203; AR, pp. 227, 248–249; RC, p. 272; JA, pp. 10–16, 51–53, 56–60; PF, pp. 111–112; BFN, p. 228; TIO, p. 44; TJ, pp. 102–109, 253–255.

  12. RC, pp. 256–257; MCCA, pp. 65–68, 86–93; JA, pp. 32–33; TIO, p. 42; TJ, p. 104.

  13. RC, p. 272; see also TCA1, TCA2, p. 335, PDM, p. 298, MCCA, p. 135.

  14. TP, p. 19; LC, pp. 105–108; RC, pp. 235, 246, 272; TCA1, pp. 26, 42; MCCA, pp. 88, 202; PDM, p. 323; JA, pp. 53, 57; PF, pp. 111–112; BFN, pp. 15–16, 161–162, 228, 322–323; TJ, pp. 86–87, 101–102, 105. Exceptions are ST, pp. 36, 54; ASI, p. 90; TCA2, pp. 1–2.

References

  • Alvesson, M. and Deetz, S. (2000) Doing Critical Management Research. London: SAGE.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Blau, A. (2007) Between facts and fictions: The theory and practice of Habermasian deliberative policy-making. Paper given at Interpretation in Policy Analysis conference; 31 May – 2 June, Amsterdam.

  • Blau, A. (2010a) Defending Means-ends Rationality against Habermas, and Defending Habermas against Applied Critical Theorists. Working Paper.

  • Blau, A. (2010b) Rethinking Instrumental Rationality. Working Paper.

  • Bohman, J. and Rehg, W. (2007) Jürgen Habermas. In: E. Zalta (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, (Summer 2007 Edition) http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2007/entries/habermas, accessed 7 June 2007.

  • Brennan, G. and Hamlin, A. (2000) Democratic Devices and Desires. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Chambers, S. (1996) Reasonable Democracy: Jürgen Habermas and the Politics of Discourse. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • deLeon, P. (2006) The historical roots of the field. In: M. Moran, M. Rein and R. Goodin (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 39–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. (1987) Rational Ecology: Environment and Political Economy. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. (1990a) Discursive Democracy: Politics, Policy, and Political Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. (1990b) Designs for environmental discourse: The greening of the administrative state? In: R. Paehlke and D. Torgerson (eds.) Managing Leviathan: Environmental Politics and the Administrative State, 1st edn. London: Belhaven, pp. 97–111.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. (1992) How far is it from Virginia and Rochester to Frankfurt? Public choice as critical theory. British Journal of Political Science 22 (4): 397–417.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. (1993) Policy analysis and planning: From science to argument. In: F. Fischer and J. Forester (eds.) The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning. London: UCL Press, pp. 213–232.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. (1994) Green reason: Communicative ethics for the biosphere. In: L. Gruen and D. Jamieson (eds.) Reflecting on Nature: Readings on Environmental Philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 159–174.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. (1995) Critical theory as a research program. In: S. White (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Habermas. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 97–119.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. (1996) Democracy in Capitalist Times: Ideals, Limits, and Struggles. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. (1997) The Politics of the Earth: Environmental Discourses, 1st edn. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. (1998) Political and ecological communication. In: J. Dryzek and D. Schlosberg (eds.) Debating the Earth: The Environmental Politics Reader. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 584–597.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. (2000) Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J (2001) Legitimacy and economy in deliberative democracy. Political Theory 29 (5): 651–669.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. (2005) Designs for environmental discourse revisited: A greener administrative state? In: R. Paehlke and D. Torgerson (eds.) Managing Leviathan: Environmental Politics and the Administrative State, 2nd edn. Plymouth, UK: Broadview, pp. 81–96.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. (2006a) Deliberative Global Politics. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. (2006b) Policy analysis as social critique. In: M. Moran, M. Rein and R. Goodin (eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Public Policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 190–203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dryzek, J. and List, C. (2003) Social choice theory and deliberative democracy: A reconciliation. British Journal of Political Science 33 (1): 1–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Elster, J. (1983) Sour Grapes: Studies in the Subversion of Rationality. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Finlayson, J.G. (2005) Habermas: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, N. (1995) What's critical about critical theory? In: J. Meehan (ed.) Feminists Read Habermas: Gendering the Subject of Discourse. London: Routledge, pp. 21–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gottweis, H. (2006) Argumentative policy analysis. In: B.G. Peters and J. Pierre (eds.) Handbook of Public Policy. London: SAGE, pp. 461–479.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1974) Theory and Practice. London: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1976) Legitimation Crisis. London: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1979) Communication and the Evolution of Society. London: Heinemann.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1982) A reply to my critics. In: J. Thompson and D. Held (eds.) Habermas: Critical Debates. Basingstoke, UK: Macmillan, pp. 219–283.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1984) The Theory of Communicative Action. Volume 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1986) Autonomy and Solidarity: Interviews. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1987a) The Theory of Communicative Action. Volume 2: Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1987b) The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity: Twelve Lectures. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1989) The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1990) Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1991) A reply. In: A. Honneth and H. Joas (eds.) Communicative Action: Essays on Jürgen Habermas's The Theory of Communicative Action. Cambridge: Polity, pp. 214–264.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1992) Postmetaphysical Thinking: Philosophical Essays. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1993) Justification and Application: Remarks on Discourse Ethics. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1994) The Past as Future. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1996) Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1998a) On the Pragmatics of Communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1998b) The Inclusion of the Other: Studies in Political Theory. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (2003) Truth and Justification. Cambridge: Polity.

    Google Scholar 

  • Innes, J. and Booher, D. (1999) Consensus building as role playing and bricolage: Toward a theory of collaborative planning. Journal of the American Planning Association 65 (1): 9–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lauria, M. and Wagner, J. (2006) What can we learn from empirical studies of planning theory? A comparative case analysis of extant literature. Journal of Planning Education and Research 25 (4): 364–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mackie, G. (2005) Comments on Ian Shapiro's The Flight From Reality in the Human Sciences. Qualitative Methods 3: 6–10.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarthy, T. (1978) The Critical Theory of Jürgen Habermas. London: Hutchinson.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potter, G. (2000) The Philosophy of Social Science: New Perspectives. Harlow, UK: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rehg, W. (1994) Insight and Solidarity: A Study in the Discourse Ethics of Jürgen Habermas. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Risse, T. (2004) Global governance and communicative action. Government and Opposition 39 (2): 288–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H. (1983) Reason in Human Affairs. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

For comments and criticisms on earlier versions of parts of this article, I thank Sorin Baiasu, Kimberley Brownlee, Jonathan Davies, John Dryzek, Alan Hamlin, John Meadowcroft, Mick Moran, Peter Niesen, John Parkinson, Jon Quong, Nick Turnbull and my referees. I am especially grateful to John Dryzek for his detailed and gracious response to my criticisms in a much earlier version of this article. Versions of this article or parts of it were given at the Political Theory conference, Manchester Metropolitan University, 6–8 September 2006; a MANCEPT (Manchester Centre for Political Theory) seminar, University of Manchester, 2 May 2007; the Interpretation in Policy Analysis annual conference, Amsterdam, 29 May – 1 June 2007; and the ECPR General Conference, Pisa, 6–8 September 2007. I thank participants at these events for their comments.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Politics, School of Social Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK

    Adrian Blau

Authors
  1. Adrian Blau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Blau, A. Rationality and deliberative democracy: A constructive critique of John Dryzek's democratic theory. Contemp Polit Theory 10, 37–57 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1057/cpt.2010.3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/cpt.2010.3

Keywords

Search

Navigation