THE RULES OF THE GAME OF DEMOCRATIC PUBLIC DISCOURSE

In response to the negative phenomena that characterize contemporary public discourse, such as the spreading of hate and toxic speech, fake news, disinformation, conspiracy theories, etc., this dissertation addresses the following research question: how should ordinary citizens publicly discuss in order to ensure social harmony? To understand the duties and responsibilities of ordinary citizens when participating in public discourse, this dissertation is structured around the key models of public discourse centered on an idea of social harmony. In particular, even if these models entail a different idea of social harmony, they all propose to conduct disputes and disagreements in a respectful and constructive manner. The first model is the Rawlsian account of public reason, the second one is the Habermasian model of deliberative democracy, and, finally, the third model is the Deweyan pragmatist approach to public discourse. The first three chapters are dedicated to analyzing these three models of public discourse. In addition, for each model, I highlight possible problems and advance critical arguments, highlighting limitations and possible challenges of each. After reconstructing them, I critically engage with these theoretical frameworks. In the final chapter, I propose a definition of public discourse and address the research question by identifying the normative principles that, in my view, constitute the rules of the game for public discourse apt to reach social harmony: (i) the duty of listening and uptake; (ii) the duty of accuracy and sincerity; (iii) the duty of civility.