?
Моральные обязательства представителя группы в делиберации о повестке
Deliberation about the agenda is one of the stages of a dispute. Its direct goal is to
determine the agenda of the dispute. Its indirect goals are varied: recognition of the group’s
rights, management of the group’s connection with its representative, and influence on the
institution of deliberation itself. Deliberation is led by a representative of the group. The
attitude of representation carries a moral obligation, especially when the issue of recognition of the group’s rights is acute. The article describes three grounds for moral obligation. The
first two are related to the concept of the common good. It is implemented by collective
rationality, which requires the maximum diversity of interests and opinions, as well as the
maximum diversity of participants in deliberation. The representative in these two cases may
be neutral with respect to the group represented. The third form of obligation arises at the
conclusion of an “affective contract”. The representative is charged with the duty of service, and
the group, with the duty of trust. The representative voluntarily appropriates the opinions,
desires and wills of the group. A high degree of intensity of affect leads to the fact that loyalty
to the group begins to contradict the common good. At the same time, such forms of behavior
of the representative become possible that deviate from the usual direct and indirect goals of
the dispute. If the goal of influencing the agenda is maintained, then the success or failure of
deliberation is combined with how the representative and the group fulfill their obligations to
each other. These combinations are described at the end of the article and form a range of
assessments and possibilities for further behavior and interaction between the group and the
representative.