Page 117 - Mike Ratner CC - WISR Complete Dissertation - v6

free manner as opposed to under conditions and processes that distort the free exchange of reasons

and information” (Rostboll, 2008, p. 14). Rostboll (2008), in his development of a theory of

deliberative freedom, addressed the philosophy of deliberative democracy advanced by Rawls

(1997) and Habermas (1989). In assessing the Rawlsian perspective of deliberation and public

reason, Rostboll (2008) first contended that the views of Rawls and Habermas about deliberative

democracy have merged to the detriment of the traditions articulated by these two philosophers.

Rostboll (2008) differentiated reasonableness, which “refers to the civic mindedness of citizens”

(p. 120) with respect to participant behaviors and motivations in deliberative settings. He called

out five virtues of reasonableness, which are useful to understanding deliberative encounters:

Participation reasonableness: Citizens are reasonable if they are willing to participate in public

deliberation by contributing their own perspectives and listening to those of others.

• Content reasonableness: Citizens are reasonable if they restrict the content of their

contributions to deliberation to reasons they can reasonably expect others to endorse.

• Contributions to deliberation reasonableness: Citizens are reasonable if any, and all

contributions to deliberation they make are reasonable.

• Decision justification reasonableness: Citizens are reasonable if the justifications for their

political decisions are reasonable.

• Form reasonableness: Citizens are reasonable if they give their contributions to deliberation

in a reasonable form. (p. 120)

In expressing these virtues, Rostboll (2008) identified two phases of participation in a

process dedicated to learning: one associated with the act of citizens having a willingness to

98