Argument In The Public Sphere

Front 1

Argument in the Public Sphere-lippman,Tannen, Dewey

Back 1

i. The citizen is stuck in an indirect relationship through voting

i. Wants to solve Lippmann’s problem
ii. Public discourse = good, argument = bad
iii. “Democracy begins in conversation”
iv. “In conversation we form the interpersonal ties…”

i. “There are offices that represent the public, but the public only acts through them”
ii. Public opinion is useless if we are not actively seeking to figure out why we think what we think
iii. Concept of the great community as the answer: an organized and articulate public needs to come into view; must have completely free social inquiry

Front 2

a. “A discursive realm in which individuals and groups may transcend their private concerns to interact freely in ways conducive to forming a common sense of reality” (Hauser, 438)

Back 2

i. Our sense of reality is formed through communication
ii. Discursive realm: a realm where discourse happens
iii. Not just isolated individuals, but groups and smaller communities
iv. Interact freely: argument, debate, storytelling, expression of identity

Front 3

b. “Discursive spaces where society deliberates about normative standards and even develops new frameworks for expressing and evaluating social reality” (Hauser, 439)

Back 3

i. Normative standards: societal norms, what we value as a society

Front 4

Argument in the public sphere Exists in a “private” realm between personal life and the state

Back 4

i. Private realm: Family
ii. Private realm: public sphere, culture, society
iii. Public realm: government
iv. The moderately private side is considered the public sphere
v. It is informal, not the state, but it is not private enough to remain only in a household

Front 5

Argument in the public sphere:Features

Back 5

i. Issues are of common concern
ii. Must be accessible to all
iii. Must allow access to information
iv. Must provide means of communication
v. Must allow unrestricted debate
vi. Must be protected institutionally

Front 6

III. Social Function: public sphere

Back 6

a. Rhetorical influence on thought and action
i. Makes passive citizens an active public
ii. Allows for opinion-formation
iii. Creates potential for public action

Front 7

IV. Origins of the Public Sphere

Back 7

a. 1960’s - - Jurgen Habermas: “The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere”
i. Assumes a “bourgeois” public
ii. A “coffeehouse” culture
iii. A place to form “practical reason”
iv. An emancipatory space
v. An exclusionary space

Front 8

b. Limits and Reformulations

Back 8

i. 1990’s - - Nancy Fraser: “Rethinking the Public Sphere”
1. Bracketing status vs. acknowledging it
2. Singular public vs. multiple publics
a. Counter publics are like bubbles that vary in size, are temporary or resilient, come together or interact but they all take the same form
3. Public issues vs. private issues
4. Society/state vs. weak/strong publics

Front 9

c. The Ideal Public Sphere

Back 9

i. Dewey’s Vision
1. Allows for publicity (allows the public to see and recognize itself)
2. Allows for participation
3. Allows for deliberative public opinion