Skip to content
Open access

Infraestructuras deliberativas inteligentes

Jul 2026 · Dixi · Vol 28, pp. 1-23 · 0 citations · 34 references

TL;DR

The proposed hypothesis is that AI, under certain conditions, has the potential to actively participate in deliberative processes within democratic frameworks, improving the quality of public debate, broadening inclusion, and strengthening collective rationality.

Abstract

This paper explores the impact of Artificial Intelligence (ai) and its various socio-technological tools on the quality of political deliberation. It particularly analyzes the deliberative processes that occur within institutional frameworks under principles of political representation. The proposed hypothesis is that AI, under certain conditions, has the potential to actively participate in deliberative processes within democratic frameworks, improving the quality of public debate, broadening inclusion, and strengthening collective rationality. To this end, two interrelated analyses are proposed, one theoretical and the other methodological: 1) the ideal conditions that any ai intervening in public deliberative processes must incorporate to preserve its democratic legitimacy; and 2) the design of a matrix that allows for verifying these conditions in specific cases.

Read PDF

Similar papers

Open access Sep 2026

Deliberative Democracy vs Automated Ombudsmanship:

This paper aims to examine the ethical dimensions of a potential incorporation of Artificial Intelligence into public complaint mediation through the institution of the ombudsman, whose existence is deeply rooted in deliberative democracy and whose operation is closely related to good governance ethics. The study inves...

K. Papadopoulou, Stavros Kalogiannidis, Foteini Kagioglou · 0 citations
Open access Sep 2026

Hegemonikon and AI

The Stoic concept of the hegemonikon—the capacity for assent that directs the mind—is used as a framework for understanding intellectual creation and decision-making, clarifying when AI supports human judgment and when it replaces decision-making authority.

Christos A. Koutsotasios, Elias Vavouras · 0 citations
Open access Sep 2026

When LLMs Threaten Democratic Autonomy

It is argued that many of the ways in which computer scientists, deliberative democratic practitioners, and others are using LLMs to do this threatens the non-instrumental value of a collective's ability to determine its own future.

Lorenzo Manuali · 0 citations
Open access Sep 2026

Michail Theodosiadis:

If political tyranny implies the exclusion of the people from public affairs, then freedom is the practice of common ownership of political institutions. Theodosiadis (2025:5-6) develops this approach by tracing its ancient Greek roots, clarifying its American traditions and identifying its institutional forms for a de...

Eleni Boliaki · 0 citations
Open access Sep 2026

Does AI undermine democratic deliberation? How engagement algorithms hijack epistemic agency

A mechanistic account according to which AI-driven engagement architectures reconfigure the cues by which beliefs are evaluated, producing unwarranted confidence in one’s own judgments and undermining the conditions for deliberative compromise is developed.

John Dorsch, Mark Coeckelbergh, Tillmann Vierkant · 1 citation
Open access Aug 2026

Computing consensus: Language ideological work in LLM ‐assisted deliberative democracy

This article examines how the digital platform Polis and its experiments with large language models (LLMs) reconfigure democratic participation through a particular vision of consensus, arguing that developers reframe consensus from a discursive achievement to a computationally surfaced pattern.

Janet E. Connor · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.