In his argument for this claim, Reid appeals to a traditional regress-style argument according to which there must be some fundamental moral principles which both ground and justify our moral deliberation on pain of our being unable to engage in such deliberation, which we clearly can (see EAP V.i).
If a moral system justifies awful acts consistently, it can't be a basis for moral deliberation.
Time pressures increase cognitive load, which might justify extending the time of deliberation beyond the constraints of the office visit by scheduling a follow up visit, using decision supports like decision aids, involving family members, or providing post-visit coaching by other health professionals [ 43].
Its definitional vagueness, combined with its rhetorical appeal, may be used to justify actions without the need for rational deliberation.
At the core of deliberative democracy, in any of its forms, is the idea that deliberation essentially involves publicly giving reasons to justify decisions, policies or laws, all of which are the means by which citizens constitute and regulate their common life together.
If, for example, the convergence view of public reason's structure is correct, then citizens and officials need not refrain from appealing to religious or otherwise comprehensive arguments in political deliberations, since those reasons might succeed in justifying a proposed law to some members of the public, even if others cannot reasonably accept those reasons (Gaus 2009; Gaus and Vallier 2009).
It seemed like a hell of a surprise that the jury managed to come up with a complete and thoughtful decision after only 21.5 hours of deliberation, and that surprise has arguably just been justified.
At the same time, the ECNH's role in licensing could justify the exclusion of public consultation in licensing and in further deliberation on the status of animals.
The fundamental normative ideal is that non-coercive, reciprocal, and generalizable deliberation should guide action, and that decision-making be justified to those affected (Forst 2011).
There was not substantial disagreement regarding selection of the level of cancer treatment and thus few statements justifying the levels selected; only 3 of 14 analyzed group deliberations involved comments about the level of cancer care selected (Additional file 3).
