Perhaps it is too much to hope for, but what I would really like is a clear answer from a member of the authorship team: Is or is not “simultaneous aural communication” a necessary criterion for a “deliberative assembly”? (Yes, I know that the group would have to adopt some special rules to include what means of simultaneous non-aural communication they would use. But if they do so, and assuming they meet all of the other “distinguishing characteristics” are they then a “deliberative assembly”?)
I think we can probably all agree that, irrespective of what the authors may say, deaf people can form deliberative assemblies, because deaf people can communicate with each other and deliberate. The fact that most of us, and all of the authors, typically use sound to communicate with each other (and thus to deliberate) is accidental and not essential.
Simultaneous Aural Communication
in Advanced Discussion
Posted
I think we can probably all agree that, irrespective of what the authors may say, deaf people can form deliberative assemblies, because deaf people can communicate with each other and deliberate. The fact that most of us, and all of the authors, typically use sound to communicate with each other (and thus to deliberate) is accidental and not essential.