Deliberation

In civil cases, the jury decision is whether to agree with the plaintiff or the defendant and rendering a resolution binding actions by the parties based on the results of the trial.

Deliberative ideals often include "face-to-face discussion, the implementation of good public policy, decision making competence, and critical mass.

This concept aligns with radical deliberation insights, suggesting that politics emerges sporadically as potential within an otherwise inert social environment.

[citation needed] Advocates of "public deliberation" as an essential democratic practice focus on processes of inclusiveness and interaction in making political decisions.

It aligns with political theories of radical democracy from figures like Michel Foucault, Ernesto Laclau, Chantal Mouffe, Jacques Rancière, and Alain Badiou.

This notion suggests distancing individuals from the means of their organization, offering a god's-eye view of the social that is coordinated by the movement of its parts.

Chantal Mouffe employs "the democratic paradox" to establish a self-sustaining political model founded on inherent contradictions.

The rhetorical gesture of the foundational paradox[clarification needed] functions as a mechanism—an interface connecting human and language machinery, fostering the conditions for ongoing reconfiguration: a positive feedback loop within politics.

Politics endures by perpetuating a dynamic between homeostasis and reconfiguration, akin to what N. Katherine Hayles terms "pattern" and "randomness".

The political mechanism facilitates future reconfigurations by adding new elements, reshaping the social fabric, and then returning to equilibrium, ensuring the perpetuity of an incomplete "whole".