The Social Context of Public Deliberation: Letting Practice Shape Theory Toward a Sociology of Deliberation1

Too often public deliberation is studied and theorized as a discrete isolated process. It is refreshing therefore to see more attempts to situate deliberation in its socio-political context. One such piece is David M. Ryfes contribution to Journal of Public Deliberation (2007) in which he considers the sociological dimensions of deliberative practice (p. 1) and in doing so makes a step toward a more explicit sociology of deliberation (p. 2). Here I review Ryfes ideas not as a sociologist but as a deliberative democrat working on the interface between practice and theory. Ryfe draws on Pierre Bourdieus field theory of society and introduces deliberative democrats to his vocabulary of society. We learn that social space is composed of different forms of capital (economic, political, cultural, social and symbolic and so on), which individuals possess to varying degrees. Around particular kinds of capital, social fields form which are conceptualised as a set of forces. Fields provide actors with capacities and socialize actors by providing them with a sense of the game - or habitus. Ryfe argues that these Bourdieuian concepts help to place deliberative practice in its proper light (p. 7). He draws out two particular insights from this theory. First, he argues that deliberative practice is fundamentally a political activity, because it presents a particular view of public life that competes with existing social visions. The political work that deliberation entails has been expressed elsewhere in terms of competing political norms and expectations (Young, 2001), discourses (Dryzek, 2000) or strategic interests (Hendriks, 2006a). Ryfes application of Bourdieus theory to deliberative practice serves as a useful reminder that its advocates are engaged in a political process as they seek to promote a particular inclusive and dialogical vision of public life