У дисертації вперше у вітчизняній соціальній філософії проведене комплексне дослідження легітимаційного потенціалу деліберативної моделі демократії в полікультурному суспільстві, можливих перешкод на шляху її імплементації та способів їх подолання. Виділені і охарактеризовані функції деліберативного процесу, які відіграють ключову роль для легітимності демократичного регулювання: когнітивна, інклюзивна, етична функції. Показано, що когнітивна функція деліберативного процесу може порушуватися внаслідок глибоких відмінностей в когнітивних засадах учасників обговорення. Ефективність комунікації залежить від підтримки етичної та інклюзивної функцій деліберативного процесу, який розуміється як кооперативна спільна активність. Встановлено, що процеси соціальної стереотипізації і еволюційні аспекти соціального пізнання можуть викликати приховані форми дискурсивних нерівностей та виявлено, що найбільш ефективний механізм дестереотипізації тісно пов'язаний із основними принципами деліберативної демократії. Обґрунтовано, що Інтернет може частково виконувати функції публічної сфери, але деліберативна функціональність в умовах нових загроз інструменталізації віртуальної комунікації залежить від правильної модерації комунікативних платформ.Ключові слова: деліберативна демократія, легітимність, полікультурне суспільство, комунікація, мультикультуралізм, культура, нормативний ідеал, дискурсивна етика, публічна сфера, громадянське суспільство, соціальна категоризація, Інтернет-комунікації.^UFor the first time in Ukrainian social philosophy this dissertation represents a comprehensive study of the legitimation potential of the deliberative model of democracy in a polycultural society. Based on Weber's types of legitimate domination, the tendencies of transforming the principles of legitimization of the socio-political order in a historical context have been revealed. It has been shown that as a result of substitution of the metaphysical bases of legitimization mechanisms by procedural principles, the formal conditions for legitimization have become the rational procedures for reaching agreement; the normative validity has been rooted in the inter-subjective agreement about such validity. The normative core of democracy is formed on the basis of the connection of the rational legitimization as a procedure with the idea of the civil self-regulation. On the basis of the anti-essentialist approach, it is shown that the criticism of the new legitimization strategy in a polycultural society, multiculturalism, is caused not only by counterproductive consequences in the course of its implementation as a state policy, but also by the defectiveness of the methodological platform of multiculturalism that is the interpretation of culture as a homogeneous integrity and stable inherent property of the ethnic community. It is substantiated that culture is not a hermeneutically sealed entity, but an intra-split complex system consisting of mutually interwoven volatile practices. The methodological platform that opens the ways for the interaction of cultures is the normative model of the deliberative democracy, within which the legitimization procedure takes root in the informal public sphere, thereby preserving the commitment to the ideal of civil self-regulation.On the basis of the analysis of the deliberative democratic theory, three functions of the deliberative process have been singled out: cognitive, inclusive and ethical function. They play a key role in the legitimization of democratic regulation. It has been established that due to the priority of the rational form of communication, the inclusive function of the deliberative process can be violated and therefore, the deliberative model of democracy is to be supplemented by aesthetic-affective forms of articulation, provided that its basic principles are preserved. It has been shown that the cognitive function of the deliberative process can be violated due to profound differences in the cognitive base of the discussion participants. The effectiveness of communication in difficult cases of intercultural interaction depends on the maintenance of the ethical and the inclusive functions of the deliberative process, which is understood as cooperative activity that includes various types of justification. It has been revealed that the processes of social stereotyping and the evolutionary aspects of social cognition can cause hidden forms of discursive inequalities. Cognitive distortions and affective reactions cause an incorrect interpretation of information and provoke an informal exclusion, disrupting the cognitive, inclusive and ethical functions of the deliberation process. The most effective mechanism for de-stereotyping is closely linked to the basic principles of a deliberative democracy and assumes intergroup interaction under the condition of common goals, equal status and institutional support. It has been substantiated that the Internet can partially fulfill the functions of the public sphere and increase the scale of existing social movements, facilitating coordination and mobilization. Virtual platforms for communicative interaction satisfy the requirements of openness and equality, which opens the way for more complete implementation of the cognitive, inclusive and ethical functionality of the deliberative process. But at the same time the virtual space provides new ways for manipulating public opinion, becomes a new field of confrontation. Deliberative functionality in the face of new threats of virtual communication instrumentalisation depends on the correct moderation of communicative platforms.Keywords: deliberative democracy, legitimacy, polycultural society, communication, multiculturalism, culture, normative ideal, discursive ethics, public sphere, civil society, social categorization, Internet communications.