ABSTRACT
The basis and essence of any democracy is to govern through discussion. For the democratic process to last, democracy must be based on argument-based discussion. Arguments are needed not only to explain one’s own position but also to convince other people of it. Argumentation is the key process through which people, regardless of their role in the public policy process, make moral judgments and choices. In the process of providing data and information, both citizens and decision-makers are supported by experts at different stages and in different ways. While the role of experts is crucial, it happens to be difficult to find the golden mean of their most optimal involvement. This chapter considers what the debate that is at the center of the decision-making processes of collegiate bodies looks like. Is it fair and based on substantive arguments? What is its style and format? Are decision-makers well prepared for their role, and do they often rely on the support of outside experts? In answering these questions, the chapter uses data from qualitative empirical research conducted among Polish local government decision-makers, including councilors, officials, and NGO activists. It concludes with the question: Can representative assemblies be spaces of collective wisdom?
