From Deliberation to Participation: Democratic Commitments and the Paradox of Voting


  • Andrija Šoć University of Belgrade, Faculty of Philosophy, Institute of Philosophy



democracy, deliberation, participation, voting, civic, commitments


In this paper, I examine the view that, surprisingly, the more citizens deliberate about politics, the less likely they are to participate in the realm of the political, and vice versa. In the first part of the paper, I approach the problem from the perspective of the paradox of voting, the claim that voting itself is instrumentally irrational because of the very low probability that a single vote will make any difference at the elections. In the second part of the paper, I argue that rather than analyzing voting instrumentally, it is better to view it as part of the civic commitments that constitute what it means to be a citizen in a democratic society. The act of voting is not primarily an individual’s attempt to decisively influence any particular outcome, but an affirmation of the key practice that upholds the democratic society in which citizens play a part. This reveals a meta-paradox of voting. Namely, to not vote is to exhibit a type of behavior that implies acceptance of democracy simultaneously with rejecting its defining component. Because of that, I will claim, not voting is itself irrational. In light of that conclusion, in the third part of the paper, I explore the extant divide between deliberation and participation by referring back to the analysis of civic commitments. Whereas participation without deliberating reveals ideological bias, deliberation without participation expresses a lack of understanding of what it means to be a citizen. The way to connect them is to engage in a process of attaining reflective equilibrium between the two, starting from the practice of deliberation that would be fully informed by the awareness of our democratic commitments and disconnected from ideologically motivated participation. 


Beerbohm, Eric Anthony (2012), In Our Name: The Ethics of Democracy, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Brennan, Jason (2011), The Ethics of Voting, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Calhoun, Craig (1988), “Populist Politics, Communication Media and Large Scale Societal Integration”, Sociological Theory 6 (3): 219–241.

Caplan, Bryan (2001), “Rational Irrationality”, Kyklos 54 (1): 3–26.

Courant, Dimitri (2021), “Citizens’ Assemblies for Referendums and Constitutional Reforms: Is There an ‘Irish Model’ for Deliberative Democracy?”, Frontiers in Political Science.

de Laat, Paul (2006), “Trusting Virtual Trust”, Ethics and Information Technology 7 (3): 167–180.

Downs, Anthony (1957), An Economic Theory of Democracy, New York: Harper and Row.

Đorđević, Ana; Vasiljević, Jelena (2022), “The Effects of Deliberation on Citizen Knowledge, Attitudes and Preferences: A Case Study of a Belgrade Mini Public”, Philosophy and Society 33 (1): 72–97.

Elstub, Stephen (2018), “Deliberative and Participative Democracy”, in André Bächtiger, John S. Dryzek, Jane Mansbridge, Mark Warren (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Deliberative Democracy, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Fiket, Irena; Đorđević, Biljana (2022), Promises and Challenges of Deliberative and Participatory Innovations in Hybrid Regimes: The Case of Two Citizens’ Assemblies in Serbia, Philosophy and Society 33 (1): 3–25.

Fishkin, James S. (1991), Democracy and Deliberation: New Directions for Democratic Reform, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

—. (1996), The Voice of the People: Public Opinion and Democracy, New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Gould, Carol C. (1988), Rethinking Democracy: Freedom and Social Cooperation in Politics, Economics and Society, New York: Cambridge University Press.

Guerrero, Alexander A. (2010), “The Paradox of Voting and the Ethics of Political Representation”, Philosophy & Public Affairs 38 (3): 272–306.

Gutmann, Amy; Thompson, Dennis (2004), Why Deliberative Democracy?, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Hawthorne, John (2004), Knowledge and Lotteries, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Kant, Immanuel (1996), Practical Philosophy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Lessig, Lawrence (2013), “Institutional Corruptions”, Edward J. Safra Working Papers 1.

Luskin, Robert C. et al. (2014), “Deliberating across Deep Divides”, Political Studies 62 (1): 116–135.

Miller, Seumas (2017), Institutional Corruption: A Study in Applied Philosophy, New York: Cambridge University Press.

Misak, Cheryl (2000), Truth, Politics, Morality, New York: Routledge.

Nardin, Terry (2017), “The New Realism and the Old”, Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 20 (3): 314–330.

Mutz, Diana (2006), Hearing the Other Side: Deliberative versus Participatory Democracy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Parsell, Mitch (2008), “Pernicious Virtual Communities: Identity, Polarisation and the Web 2.0”, Ethics and Information Technology 10 (1): 41–56.

Peirce, Charles Sanders (1878), “How to Make Our Ideas Clear”, Popular Science Monthly, 12 (January): 286–302; Reprinted in Christian J. Kloesel, Max H. Fisch, et al. (eds.) (1986), Writings of Charles S. Peirce: A Chronological Edition (Volume 3: 1872–1878), Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, pp. 257–276.

Putnam, Hilary; Putnam, Ruth Anna (2017), Pragmatism as a Way of Life, Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

Rippon, Simon (2014), “Were Kant’s Hypothetical Imperatives Wide-Scope Oughts?”, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 92 (4): 783–788.

Rose-Ackerman, Susan (2015), From Elections to Democracy Building Accountable Government in Hungary and Poland, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schroeder, Mark (2005), “The Hypothetical Imperative?”, Australasian Journal of Philosophy 83 (3): 357–372.

Singer, Peter (1973), Democracy and Disobedience, Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Steiner, Jürg et al. (2017), Deliberation across Deeply Divided Societies, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Suiter, Jane (2021), “A Modest Proposal: Building a Deliberative System in Northern Ireland”, Irish Studies in International Affairs 32 (2): 247–270.

Suiter, Jane et al. (2021), “Measuring Epistemic Deliberation on Polarized Issues: The Case of Abortion Provision in Ireland”, Political Studies Review, 1-18.

Sunstein, Cass (2008), “Democracy and the Internet”, in Information Technology and Moral Philosophy, J. van den Hoven and J. Weckert (eds.), Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press, 93–110.

Thompson, Dennis F. (2018), “Theories of Institutional Corruption”, Annual Review of Political Science 21: 495–513.

Temming, Maria (2018), “On Twitter, the Lure of Fake News Is Stronger than the Truth”, Science News, 3 March, 193(6): 14.

Waldron, Jeremy (1999), Law and Disagreement, Oxford: Clarendon Press.

Westen, Drew (2008), The Political Brain: How We Make Up Our Minds without Using Our Heads, New York: Perseus Books.

Zakaras, Alex (2018), “Complicity and Coercion: Toward and Ethics of Political Participation”, in Oxford Studies in Political Philosophy, Volume 4, David Sobel, Peter Vallentyne, Steven Wall (eds.), Oxford: Oxford University Press, ch. 8.



How to Cite

Šoć, A. (2022) “From Deliberation to Participation: Democratic Commitments and the Paradox of Voting”, Filozofija i društvo/Philosophy and Society. Belgrade, Serbia, 33(1), pp. 98–119. doi: 10.2298/FID2201098S.