Šoć, Andrija

Link to this page

Authority KeyName Variants
888a91fd-983e-47da-948f-b9fa657c6ce6
  • Šoć, Andrija (3)
Projects

Author's Bibliography

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

Šoć, Andrija

(Beograd : Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju, 2022)

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Šoć, Andrija
PY  - 2022
UR  - https://journal.instifdt.bg.ac.rs/index.php/fid/article/view/1434
UR  - http://rifdt.instifdt.bg.ac.rs/123456789/2535
AB  - 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.
AB  - U ovom gradu, ispitujem gledište prema kom, iznenađujuće, što se češće građani upuštaju u političku deliberaciju, to su manje skloni političkoj participaciji, i obrnuto. U prvom delu rada, razmatram ovaj problem iz ugla paradoksa glasanja, teze da je sam akt glasanja instrumentalno iracionalan pošto postoji jako mala verovatnoća da jedan glas napravi bilo kakvu razliku na izborima. U drugom delu rada, tvrdiću da, umesto da glasanje analiziramo instrumentalno, bolje je da ga posmatramo kao deo građanskih obaveza koje konstituišu građansku ulogu u demokratskom društvu. Akt glasanja ne treba primarno shvatiti kao pokušaj jedne osobe da izvrši odlučujući uticaj na bilo koji konkretan ishod, već afirmacija ključne prakse koja čini jedno društvo demokratskim. Ovo otkriva svojevrsni meta-paradoks glasanja. Naime, ne glasati znači istovremeno implicirati prihvatanje demokratije i neprihvatanje njene suštinske komponente. S obzirom na to, kako ću pokušati da pokažem, samo neglasanje je iracionalno. U svetlu ovog zaključka, u trećem delu rada istražujem jaz između deliberacije i participacije u svetlu analize građanskih uloga. Dok participacija bez deliberacije otkriva ideološku ostrašćenost, deliberacija bez participacije implicira nerazumevanje toga šta znači biti građanin. Deliberacija i participacija se mogu efektno povezati ako se uspostavi refleksivni ekvilibrijum između njih. To se, kako ću tvrditi, može ostvariti putem procesa čiji je prvi korak uspostavljanje deliberativne prakse koja je u potpunosti utemeljena na svesti građana o njihovim demokratskim ulogama, a izolovana od ideološki motivisane participacije.
PB  - Beograd : Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju
T2  - Filozofija i društvo / Philosophy and Society
T1  - From Deliberation to Participation: Democratic Commitments and the Paradox of Voting
T1  - Od deliberacije do participacije: demokratske uloge i paradoks glas
IS  - 1
VL  - 33
SP  - 98
EP  - 119
DO  - 10.2298/FID2201098S
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Šoć, Andrija",
year = "2022",
abstract = "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., U ovom gradu, ispitujem gledište prema kom, iznenađujuće, što se češće građani upuštaju u političku deliberaciju, to su manje skloni političkoj participaciji, i obrnuto. U prvom delu rada, razmatram ovaj problem iz ugla paradoksa glasanja, teze da je sam akt glasanja instrumentalno iracionalan pošto postoji jako mala verovatnoća da jedan glas napravi bilo kakvu razliku na izborima. U drugom delu rada, tvrdiću da, umesto da glasanje analiziramo instrumentalno, bolje je da ga posmatramo kao deo građanskih obaveza koje konstituišu građansku ulogu u demokratskom društvu. Akt glasanja ne treba primarno shvatiti kao pokušaj jedne osobe da izvrši odlučujući uticaj na bilo koji konkretan ishod, već afirmacija ključne prakse koja čini jedno društvo demokratskim. Ovo otkriva svojevrsni meta-paradoks glasanja. Naime, ne glasati znači istovremeno implicirati prihvatanje demokratije i neprihvatanje njene suštinske komponente. S obzirom na to, kako ću pokušati da pokažem, samo neglasanje je iracionalno. U svetlu ovog zaključka, u trećem delu rada istražujem jaz između deliberacije i participacije u svetlu analize građanskih uloga. Dok participacija bez deliberacije otkriva ideološku ostrašćenost, deliberacija bez participacije implicira nerazumevanje toga šta znači biti građanin. Deliberacija i participacija se mogu efektno povezati ako se uspostavi refleksivni ekvilibrijum između njih. To se, kako ću tvrditi, može ostvariti putem procesa čiji je prvi korak uspostavljanje deliberativne prakse koja je u potpunosti utemeljena na svesti građana o njihovim demokratskim ulogama, a izolovana od ideološki motivisane participacije.",
publisher = "Beograd : Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju",
journal = "Filozofija i društvo / Philosophy and Society",
title = "From Deliberation to Participation: Democratic Commitments and the Paradox of Voting, Od deliberacije do participacije: demokratske uloge i paradoks glas",
number = "1",
volume = "33",
pages = "98-119",
doi = "10.2298/FID2201098S"
}
Šoć, A.. (2022). From Deliberation to Participation: Democratic Commitments and the Paradox of Voting. in Filozofija i društvo / Philosophy and Society
Beograd : Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju., 33(1), 98-119.
https://doi.org/10.2298/FID2201098S
Šoć A. From Deliberation to Participation: Democratic Commitments and the Paradox of Voting. in Filozofija i društvo / Philosophy and Society. 2022;33(1):98-119.
doi:10.2298/FID2201098S .
Šoć, Andrija, "From Deliberation to Participation: Democratic Commitments and the Paradox of Voting" in Filozofija i društvo / Philosophy and Society, 33, no. 1 (2022):98-119,
https://doi.org/10.2298/FID2201098S . .
1

Deliberative Education and Quality of Deliberation: Toward a Critical Dialogue and Resolving Deep Disagreements

Šoć, Andrija

(Beograd : Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju, 2021)

TY  - CHAP
AU  - Šoć, Andrija
PY  - 2021
UR  - http://rifdt.instifdt.bg.ac.rs/123456789/2512
AB  - This paper consists of two main parts.1 First, I discuss the results of recent empirical research on deliberation in deeply divided societies and outline why the occurrence of deliberative transformative moments (DTM) in deliberative discussions offers significant reasons for optimism regarding the applicability of the fundamental ideas of deliberative democracy. I will examine the increase of positive DTMs and consider how the quality of deliberation could be increased. As we will see, efficient deliberation must strive for more than just its stated fundamental goals – a better understanding of how citizens rank their preferences and the views they defend during deliberative discussions. Attempting to show how that can be effectively accomplished, in the second part of the paper I will formulate an approach consisting of two elements: a descriptive measure of the quality of deliberation – the DQ index, and a normative standard that can help us build a framework for constructive critical discussion – Grice’s conversational maxims based on his cooperation principle, as well as his view of conversational implicatures. The ideal goal of such an endeavour, I will claim, is to show that deliberative education can help future voters achieve citizen emancipation by adopting Kant’s advice ‘dare to think’ and expanding it with the advice to ‘dare to be proven wrong on the strength of a better argument’.
PB  - Beograd : Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju
T2  - Liberating Education: What From, What For?
T1  - Deliberative Education and Quality of Deliberation: Toward a Critical Dialogue and Resolving Deep Disagreements
UR  - https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_rifdt_2512
ER  - 
@inbook{
author = "Šoć, Andrija",
year = "2021",
abstract = "This paper consists of two main parts.1 First, I discuss the results of recent empirical research on deliberation in deeply divided societies and outline why the occurrence of deliberative transformative moments (DTM) in deliberative discussions offers significant reasons for optimism regarding the applicability of the fundamental ideas of deliberative democracy. I will examine the increase of positive DTMs and consider how the quality of deliberation could be increased. As we will see, efficient deliberation must strive for more than just its stated fundamental goals – a better understanding of how citizens rank their preferences and the views they defend during deliberative discussions. Attempting to show how that can be effectively accomplished, in the second part of the paper I will formulate an approach consisting of two elements: a descriptive measure of the quality of deliberation – the DQ index, and a normative standard that can help us build a framework for constructive critical discussion – Grice’s conversational maxims based on his cooperation principle, as well as his view of conversational implicatures. The ideal goal of such an endeavour, I will claim, is to show that deliberative education can help future voters achieve citizen emancipation by adopting Kant’s advice ‘dare to think’ and expanding it with the advice to ‘dare to be proven wrong on the strength of a better argument’.",
publisher = "Beograd : Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju",
journal = "Liberating Education: What From, What For?",
booktitle = "Deliberative Education and Quality of Deliberation: Toward a Critical Dialogue and Resolving Deep Disagreements",
url = "https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_rifdt_2512"
}
Šoć, A.. (2021). Deliberative Education and Quality of Deliberation: Toward a Critical Dialogue and Resolving Deep Disagreements. in Liberating Education: What From, What For?
Beograd : Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju..
https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_rifdt_2512
Šoć A. Deliberative Education and Quality of Deliberation: Toward a Critical Dialogue and Resolving Deep Disagreements. in Liberating Education: What From, What For?. 2021;.
https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_rifdt_2512 .
Šoć, Andrija, "Deliberative Education and Quality of Deliberation: Toward a Critical Dialogue and Resolving Deep Disagreements" in Liberating Education: What From, What For? (2021),
https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_rifdt_2512 .

Ka obuhvatnom pojmu poverenja

Šoć, Andrija

(Beograd : Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju, 2021)

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Šoć, Andrija
PY  - 2021
UR  - http://rifdt.instifdt.bg.ac.rs/123456789/2235
AB  - U  ovom  radu  ću  razmotriti  fenomen  poverenja  iz  dva  ugla.  Prvi  deo  rada će se ticati empirijskih pristupa u istraživanju poverenja. Ukrat-ko ću razmotriti pet aktuelnih debata o prednostima i manama razli-čitih empirijskih pristupa, da bih zatim ukazao na to da svaka od njih zahteva preciznije određenje poverenja. U drugom delu rada, poći ću od trenutno dominantne debate između onih koji poverenje izjedna-čavaju  sa  ponašanjem  i  onih  koji  ga  izjednačavaju  sa  očekivanjem.  Govoriću o problemima oba ova pristupa, kao i o tezi da je poverenje crta ličnosti. Iako svaka od ponuđenih opcija ima svoje dobre strane, poverenje je, pokušaću da pokažem, suviše kompleksan fenomen da bi  se  odredilo  na  tako  jednostavan  način.  Rad  završavam  obuhvat-nom  definicijom  poverenja  koja  uključuje  i  neke  od  pomenutih  ele-menata,  ali  i  druge  značajne  aspekte  tog  fenomena,  i  za  koju  se  na-dam  da  može  da  posluži  kao  polazna  tačka  u  formulisanju  budućih  empirijskih istraživanja.
AB  - In this paper I will approach the phenomenon of trust from two angles. The first part of the paper will deal with empirical research of trust. I will outline five ongoing de-bates regarding the pros and cons of different types of such research, and subsequent-ly point out that each side in these debates requires a more precise definition of trust. In the second part of the paper, I will start with the currently prevalent debate between those who equate trust with behaviour and those who define it as an expectation. I will talk about the problems of both these approaches, and also about the thesis that trust is a character trait. Although each of these options has its own merits, I will try to show that trust is a phenomenon that is too complex for any simple or straightfor-ward definition. I conclude the paper by providing a comprehensive definition of trust, which includes some of the mentioned elements, but also several other significant aspects of the phenomenon, and which I hope can serve as a starting point in formu-lating future empirical research.
PB  - Beograd : Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju
T2  - Kritika: časopis za filozofiju i teoriju društva
T1  - Ka obuhvatnom pojmu poverenja
T1  - Toward a Comprehensive Concept of Trust
IS  - 1
VL  - 2
SP  - 35
EP  - 52
DO  - 10.5281/zenodo.4784241
ER  - 
@article{
author = "Šoć, Andrija",
year = "2021",
abstract = "U  ovom  radu  ću  razmotriti  fenomen  poverenja  iz  dva  ugla.  Prvi  deo  rada će se ticati empirijskih pristupa u istraživanju poverenja. Ukrat-ko ću razmotriti pet aktuelnih debata o prednostima i manama razli-čitih empirijskih pristupa, da bih zatim ukazao na to da svaka od njih zahteva preciznije određenje poverenja. U drugom delu rada, poći ću od trenutno dominantne debate između onih koji poverenje izjedna-čavaju  sa  ponašanjem  i  onih  koji  ga  izjednačavaju  sa  očekivanjem.  Govoriću o problemima oba ova pristupa, kao i o tezi da je poverenje crta ličnosti. Iako svaka od ponuđenih opcija ima svoje dobre strane, poverenje je, pokušaću da pokažem, suviše kompleksan fenomen da bi  se  odredilo  na  tako  jednostavan  način.  Rad  završavam  obuhvat-nom  definicijom  poverenja  koja  uključuje  i  neke  od  pomenutih  ele-menata,  ali  i  druge  značajne  aspekte  tog  fenomena,  i  za  koju  se  na-dam  da  može  da  posluži  kao  polazna  tačka  u  formulisanju  budućih  empirijskih istraživanja., In this paper I will approach the phenomenon of trust from two angles. The first part of the paper will deal with empirical research of trust. I will outline five ongoing de-bates regarding the pros and cons of different types of such research, and subsequent-ly point out that each side in these debates requires a more precise definition of trust. In the second part of the paper, I will start with the currently prevalent debate between those who equate trust with behaviour and those who define it as an expectation. I will talk about the problems of both these approaches, and also about the thesis that trust is a character trait. Although each of these options has its own merits, I will try to show that trust is a phenomenon that is too complex for any simple or straightfor-ward definition. I conclude the paper by providing a comprehensive definition of trust, which includes some of the mentioned elements, but also several other significant aspects of the phenomenon, and which I hope can serve as a starting point in formu-lating future empirical research.",
publisher = "Beograd : Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju",
journal = "Kritika: časopis za filozofiju i teoriju društva",
title = "Ka obuhvatnom pojmu poverenja, Toward a Comprehensive Concept of Trust",
number = "1",
volume = "2",
pages = "35-52",
doi = "10.5281/zenodo.4784241"
}
Šoć, A.. (2021). Ka obuhvatnom pojmu poverenja. in Kritika: časopis za filozofiju i teoriju društva
Beograd : Institut za filozofiju i društvenu teoriju., 2(1), 35-52.
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4784241
Šoć A. Ka obuhvatnom pojmu poverenja. in Kritika: časopis za filozofiju i teoriju društva. 2021;2(1):35-52.
doi:10.5281/zenodo.4784241 .
Šoć, Andrija, "Ka obuhvatnom pojmu poverenja" in Kritika: časopis za filozofiju i teoriju društva, 2, no. 1 (2021):35-52,
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4784241 . .