Narrative Procedure of Political Deliberation

Name: Vladimir Lukić

Supervisor: Matej Cíbik


Dissertation Subject: Narrative Procedure of Political Deliberation

Dissertation Abstract:

The current state of the matter which my project deals with is the following – we have two contested views, the one which states that the substance of our deliberation comes from the certain conception of the good, while the second one states that the good is secondary to the procedures of the right. When we dwell into this debate, we are seeing Rawlsian liberal theorists who are standing on the basis of the right, while the philosophers of communitarianism (but not exclusively) propose the priority of the good. The philosophers of the first branch often portray our political deliberation as being constituted by our reasonable apparatus and our procedures of thought. That is to say; our reason giving ability is the primary source of our deliberative power. The philosophers on the second branch, however, write that this procedure comes after our rationality is shaped by our embeddedness in the culture/history/society. Therefore, when we talk about political deliberation, we talk about two theories which are contested in nature.

My thesis, as it is stated in the name of the project, is dealing with the problem of political deliberation. The main goal of my thesis is to show that the conception of the good, which I take the notion of the narrative to be, can add substance to the constructivist procedure of political deliberation that we find in the contemporary political theory. Within this project, I will be working on the parts which contribute to our understanding what narrative is, taken as a substantial view and, on the other hand, constructivism can be seen as a formal principle which “guides” and “transforms” this substance.

I believe that my thesis can shed some light on the debate on political deliberation. This is seen as one of the more relevant topics in the field of the political philosophy because it deals with the starting position when talking about the morality of institutions. Namely, I would like to tackle the priority argument (the good vs the right) and propose a view which can, in a way, reconcile the philosophers of the good and of the right. My view is based on the theory of the good, however, it encompasses the deliberative elements from the theory of the right. In the regards to my project, the good, which is taken as a basis for the political deliberation is found in the conception of the socio-historical narrative. However, for that narrative to progress, we would need a regulating factor which is found in the constructivist method which serves as the right.