Beyond the Fact of Disagreement? The Epistemic Turn in Deliberative Democracy

This paper takes stock of a recent but growing movement within the field of deliberative democracy, which normatively argues for the epistemic dimension of democratic authority and positively defends the truth-tracking properties of democratic procedures. Authors within that movement call themselves epistemic democrats, hence the recognition by many of an epistemic turn' in democratic theory. The paper argues that this turn is a desirable direction in which the field ought to evolve, taking it beyond the fact of disagreement' that had previously blocked the conceptual road to acknowledging more than intrinsic properties to democratic decision procedures. The paper shows how two authors in particular - Joshua Cohen and David Estlund - have successfully lifted the Rawlsian requirement of epistemic abstinence and defends epistemic democrats and the implications of the epistemic turn in democratic theory against various misconceptions.