Abstract

The predominant theory of democracy, that of rational deliberation, is based on the presumption that there is a moral theory as a basis of normative validity of the decisions acquired in a process of rational deliberation. The individual who starts from the idea that he has to use rational means of persuasion will implicitly believe that the rational argument will be the only instrument of persuasion, a priori excluding force, coercion or manipulation from the space of the common living. In other words, the process of rational deliberation presumes an equality of positions in society, deriving from the symmetry of positions in dialogue. Starting from these considerations, Habermas builds up a theory focused on the following principle: in society, rules have moral validity only and if only they are discursively built up as a result of a deliberative process that must follow some conditions; anyone can bring any assertion in dialogue; anyone can contest any assertion; no one can be prevented from practicing the rights mentioned above.