ABSTRACT
This chapter analyzes three different conceptions of impartiality, all of which have their roots in North American history. It analyzes these conceptions in connection with two relevant variables: deliberation and public participation. The chapter begins by analyzing concept (X) where neither public participation nor deliberation is necessary requirements for achieving impartiality. It illustrates this concept by reference to the most traditional interpretation of the Federalists' view of politics. The first concept of impartiality assumes that impartiality is not connected with public deliberation. On the contrary, it is presumed that large bodies of people tend to undermine rather than promote the adoption of correct solutions. The second concept of impartiality accepts the importance of deliberation for achieving neutral, unbiased decisions. However, public participation is unnecessary, if not undesirable, for evaluating the neutrality of any specific solution.
