Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-06T02:12:13.822Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Vulnerable Dynamics of Discourse

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 May 2021

Paul Giladi  and
Danielle Petherbridge
Paul Giladi*
Affiliation:
Manchester Metropolitan University
Danielle Petherbridge*
Affiliation:
University College Dublin
*
[email protected]
[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In this paper, we offer some compelling reasons to think that issues relating to vulnerability play a significant – albeit thus far underacknowledged – role in Jürgen Habermas’s notions of communicative action and discourse. We shall argue that the basic notions of discourse and communicative action presuppose a robust conception of vulnerability and that recognising vulnerability is essential for (i) making sense of the social character of knowledge, on the epistemic side of things, and for (ii) making sense of the possibility of deliberative democracy, on the political side of things. Our paper is divided into four principal sections. In Section 1, we provide a basic outline of Habermas on communicative action and discourse. In Section 2, we develop an account of vulnerability and communication in the context of speaker/hearer relations. We specifically focus on distorted communication, vulnerability and speech. In Section 3, we focus on elaborating epistemic pathologies in the context of epistemic oppression and testimonial injustice. In Section 4, we focus on explaining how Habermasian resources contribute to vulnerability theory, and how introducing vulnerability theory to Habermas broadens or deepens his theory of communication action and his discourse ethics theory.

Type
Papers
Information
Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements , Volume 89: How Do We Know? The Social Dimension of Knowledge , May 2021 , pp. 195 - 225
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Philosophy and the contributors 2021

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Allen, Amy, ‘Systematically Distorted Subjectivity? Habermas and the Critique of Power’, Philosophy and Social Criticism 33 (2007), 641–50.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austin, J.L., How to do Things with Words, eds. Urmson, J. O. and Sbisà, Marina, 2nd Edition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1975).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Benhabib, Seyla, ‘The Generalised and the Concrete Other: The Kohlberg-Gilligan Controversy’, Praxis International 5 (1986), 402–424.Google Scholar
Benhabib, Seyla Critique, Norm and Utopia: A Study of the Foundations of Critical Theory (New York, Columbia University Press, 1986).Google Scholar
Brandom, Robert B., Making It Explicit: Reasoning, Representing, and Discursive Commitment, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1994).Google Scholar
Brandom, Robert B. Tales of the Mighty Dead: Historical Essays in the Metaphysics of Intentionality, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2002).Google Scholar
Burge, Tyler, ‘Content Preservation’, The Philosophical Review 102 (1993), 457–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Butler, Judith, Precarious Life: The Powers of Mourning and Violence (New York: Verso, 2004).Google Scholar
Chambers, Simone, ‘Feminist Discourse/Practical Discourse’ in Feminists Read Habermas: Gendering the Subject of Discourse, ed. Meehan, Johanna (New York & London, Routledge, 1995).Google Scholar
Davis, Emmalon, ‘Typecasts, Tokens, and Spokespersons: A Case for Credibility Excess as Testimonial Injustice’, Hypatia 31 (2016), 485–501.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dotson, Kristie, ‘Conceptualising Epistemic Oppression’, Social Epistemology 28 (2014), 115–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fichte, J. G., Foundations of Natural Right, ed. Neuhouser, Frederick, trans. Baur, Michael, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000).Google Scholar
Fricker, Miranda F., Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giladi, Paul, ‘Epistemic Exploitation and Ideological Recognition’, in Epistemic Injustice and the Philosophy of Recognition, eds. Giladi, Paul and McMillan, Nicola (New York: Routledge, forthcoming).Google Scholar
Giladi, Paul, ‘Epistemic Injustice: A Role for Recognition?’, Philosophy & Social Criticism 44 (2018), 141–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Giladi, Paul, ‘The Agent in Pain: Alienation and Discursive Abuse’, International Journal of Philosophical Studies 28 (2020), 692–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gooding-Williams, Robert, Look, a Negro!: Philosophical Essays on Race, Culture and Politics (New York: Routledge, 2006).Google Scholar
Grice, Paul H., ‘Logic and Conversation’, in Syntax and Semantics 3: Speech Acts, eds. Cole, Peter and Morgan, Jerry L. (New York: Academic Press, 1975).Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen, Knowledge and Human Interests, trans. Shapiro, J. J. (Boston: Beacon Press, 1971).Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen Theory and Practice, trans. Viertel, John (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1973).Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen The Theory of Communicative Action: Volume One. Reason and the Rationalisation of Society, trans. McCarthy, Thomas (Beacon Press, Boston, 1984).Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen The Theory of Communicative Action: Volume Two. Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason (Beacon Press, Boston, 1987a).Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen The Philosophical Discourse of Modernity: Twelve Lectures, trans. Lawrence, Frederick (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1987b).Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen ‘Morality and Ethical Life: Does Hegel’s Critique of Kant Apply to Discourse Ethics?’ in Moral Consciousness and Communicative Action, trans. Lenhardt, C. and Weber Nicholsen, S. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1990).Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen Postmetaphysical Thinking, trans. Hohengarten, W. M. (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1992).Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen Between Facts and Norms: Contributions to a Discourse Theory of Law and Democracy, trans. Rehg, William (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1996).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen On the Pragmatics of Social Interaction, trans. Fultner, Barbara (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2001).Google Scholar
Honneth, Axel, ‘Moral Consciousness and Class Domination: Some Problems in the Analysis of Hidden Morality,’ in The Fragmented World of the Social: Essays in Social and Political Philosophy, ed. Wright, C.W. (Albany: SUNY Press, 1995).Google Scholar
Honneth, Axel The Struggle for Recognition: The Moral Grammar of Social Conflicts, trans. Anderson, Joel (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1995).Google Scholar
Honneth, Axel Freedom's Right: The Social Foundations of Democratic Life, trans. Ganahl, Joseph (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hornsby, Jennifer and Langton, Rae, ‘Free Speech and Illocution’, Legal Theory 4 (1998), 21–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Houlgate, Stephen, ‘Hegel and Brandom on Norms, Concepts and Logical Categories’, in German Idealism: Contemporary Perspectives, ed. Hammer, Espen (London: Routledge, 2007).Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel, Anthropology from a Pragmatic Point of View, trans. and ed. Louden, R. B., (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006).Google Scholar
Kukla, Rebecca, ‘Performative Force, Convention, and Discursive Injustice’, Hypatia 29 (2014), 440–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lobb, Andrea, ‘‘Prediscursive Epistemic Injury’: Recognising Another Form of Epistemic Injustice?’ Feminist Philosophy Quarterly 4 (2018 Article 3), 1–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCarthy, Thomas, ‘Die politische Philosophie und das Problem der Rasse’, in Die Öffentlichkeit der Vernunft und die Vernunft der Öffentlichkeit: Festschrift für Jürgen Habermas, eds. Wingert, Lutz and Günther, Klaus (Frankfurt, Suhrkamp, 2001).Google Scholar
Mead, G.H., Mind, Self, and Society: The Definitive Edition, eds. Morris, C. W., Huebner, D. R. and Joas, H. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2015).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Medina, José, ‘Misrecognition and Epistemic Injustice’, Feminist Philosophy Quarterly 4 (2018 Article 1), 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Niemi, Jari I., ‘Habermas and Validity Claims’, International Journal of Philosophical Studies 13 (2005), 227–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petherbridge, Danielle, The Critical Theory of Axel Honneth (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books, 2013).Google Scholar
Petherbridge, Danielle ‘What’s Critical about Vulnerability? Rethinking Interdependence, Recognition and Power’, Hypatia 31 (2016), 589–604.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Petherbridge, Danielle ‘How Do We Respond? Embodied Vulnerability and Ethical Responsiveness’, in New Feminist Perspectives on Embodiment eds. Fischer, Clara and Dolezal, Luna (Palgrave MacMillan, 2018).Google Scholar
Petherbridge, Danielle ‘Recognition, Vulnerability and Trust’, International Journal of Philosophical Studies, 29 (2021).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rehg, William, Insight and Solidarity: A Study in the Discourse Ethics of Jürgen Habermas, Berkeley, Los Angeles (London, University of California Press, 1994).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rorty, Richard, Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sellars, Wilfrid, Science, Perception and Reality, (London: Routledge, 1991).Google Scholar
Stawarska, Beata, ‘Linguistic Encounters: The Performativity of Active Listening’, in Body/Self/Other: The Phenomenology of Social Encounters, eds. Dolezal, Luna and Petherbridge, Danielle (Albany: SUNY Press, 2017).Google Scholar
Williams, Patricia J.. The Alchemy of Race and Rights: Diary of a Law Professor (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991).Google Scholar
Zurn, Christopher F.. Axel Honneth: A Critical Theory of the Social (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2015).Google Scholar