Nudging and deliberation: individual autonomy, epistemic vices and virtues

Abstract

Since there is a growing worldwide trend of using behavioral sciences to inform public policy decisions, this paper aims to consider and critically review two strategies for improving people’s behavior and decisionmaking in public space: nudging and public deliberation. Should policymakers develop mechanisms for guiding the choices of their citizens or support and encourage them to make better decisions by themselves? In other words, the question is whether governments can influence people to make better decisions without violating their freedom and autonomy. The debate about “libertarian paternalism” has raised many questions about the possibility of reconciling the basic assumptions of these two concepts into one. This position entails the creation of public policies by using nudging to help people make better decisions (related to health, wealth, and happiness) without limiting their freedom of choice. We will consider the arguments for and against this intervention, its consequences for personal autonomy, and the development of epistemic vices.