ARE WE POST-JUSTIFICATION? STOUT’S CASE FOR SELF-KNOWLEDGE, POLITICAL JUSTIFICATION AND PUBLIC PHILOSOPHY

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Burks, Deven
Data de Publicação: 2023
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: eng
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: https://doi.org/10.21814/eps.1.1.55
Resumo: Must the participant to public discourse have knowledge of her beliefs, attitudes and reasons as well as belief-formation processes to have justified political belief? In this paper, we test this question with reference to Jeffrey Stout’s (2004) approach to public discourse and public philosophy. After defining selfknowledge and justification along the lines of James Pryor (2004), we map thereon Stout’s view of public discourse and public philosophy as democratic piety, earnest storytelling and Brandomian expressive rationality. We then lay out Brian Leiter’s (2016) naturalistic critique of public philosophy as “discursive hygiene” to see whether Stoutian public philosophy survives the former’s emotivist-tribalist gauntlet. Lastly, we find that Leiter’s critique proves less radical than it may appear and requires the moderating influence of a public philosophy like Stout’s. All in all, Stoutian public discourse and public philosophy powerfully illustrates a strong, necessary connection between self-knowledge and political justification. Post-truth is not post-justification.
id RCAP_f0676770e30e0e2bca48b81872910fe7
oai_identifier_str oai:journals.uminho.pt:article/4657
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling ARE WE POST-JUSTIFICATION? STOUT’S CASE FOR SELF-KNOWLEDGE, POLITICAL JUSTIFICATION AND PUBLIC PHILOSOPHYESTAREMOS NA ÉPOCA DA PÓS-JUSTIFICAÇÃO? O ARGUMENTO DE STOUT A FAVOR DO AUTO-CONHECIMENTO, DA JUSTIFICAÇÃO POLÍTICA E DA FILOSOFIA PÚBLICA8TH BRAGA MEETINGS ON ETHICS AND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY, WITH GUSTAF ARRHENIUSMust the participant to public discourse have knowledge of her beliefs, attitudes and reasons as well as belief-formation processes to have justified political belief? In this paper, we test this question with reference to Jeffrey Stout’s (2004) approach to public discourse and public philosophy. After defining selfknowledge and justification along the lines of James Pryor (2004), we map thereon Stout’s view of public discourse and public philosophy as democratic piety, earnest storytelling and Brandomian expressive rationality. We then lay out Brian Leiter’s (2016) naturalistic critique of public philosophy as “discursive hygiene” to see whether Stoutian public philosophy survives the former’s emotivist-tribalist gauntlet. Lastly, we find that Leiter’s critique proves less radical than it may appear and requires the moderating influence of a public philosophy like Stout’s. All in all, Stoutian public discourse and public philosophy powerfully illustrates a strong, necessary connection between self-knowledge and political justification. Post-truth is not post-justification.Será que quem participa no discurso público tem de ter conhecimento das suas crenças, atitudes e razões, bem como dos processos de formação de crenças, de forma a ter crenças políticas justificadas? Neste artigo, testamos esta questão tendo como referência a abordagem de Jeffrey Stout (2004) ao discurso público e à filosofia pública. Depois de definirmos auto-conhecimento e justificação seguindo James Pryor (2004), aplicamos a perspectiva de Stout do discurso público e da filosofia pública como piedade democrática, narração honesta e racionalidade expressiva brandomiana. Em seguida, apresentamos a crítica naturalista de Brian Leiter (2016) à filosofia pública como “higiene discursiva” para determinar se a filosofia pública tal como a concebe Stout sobrevive ao desafio emotivista-tribalista daquele. Finalmente, concluímos que a crítica de Leiter é menos radical do que poderia parecer e requer a influência moderadora de uma filosofia pública como a de Stout. Afinal, o discurso público e a filosofia pública que Stout defende ilustram de forma poderosa uma conexão forte e necessária entre auto-conhecimento e justificação política. A pós-verdade não é pós-justificação.Centre for Ethics, Politics, and Society - ELACH, University of Minho2023-09-26info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlehttps://doi.org/10.21814/eps.1.1.55eng2184-25822184-2574Burks, Deveninfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2024-01-29T10:56:31Zoai:journals.uminho.pt:article/4657Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-20T01:58:41.376862Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv ARE WE POST-JUSTIFICATION? STOUT’S CASE FOR SELF-KNOWLEDGE, POLITICAL JUSTIFICATION AND PUBLIC PHILOSOPHY
ESTAREMOS NA ÉPOCA DA PÓS-JUSTIFICAÇÃO? O ARGUMENTO DE STOUT A FAVOR DO AUTO-CONHECIMENTO, DA JUSTIFICAÇÃO POLÍTICA E DA FILOSOFIA PÚBLICA
title ARE WE POST-JUSTIFICATION? STOUT’S CASE FOR SELF-KNOWLEDGE, POLITICAL JUSTIFICATION AND PUBLIC PHILOSOPHY
spellingShingle ARE WE POST-JUSTIFICATION? STOUT’S CASE FOR SELF-KNOWLEDGE, POLITICAL JUSTIFICATION AND PUBLIC PHILOSOPHY
Burks, Deven
8TH BRAGA MEETINGS ON ETHICS AND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY, WITH GUSTAF ARRHENIUS
title_short ARE WE POST-JUSTIFICATION? STOUT’S CASE FOR SELF-KNOWLEDGE, POLITICAL JUSTIFICATION AND PUBLIC PHILOSOPHY
title_full ARE WE POST-JUSTIFICATION? STOUT’S CASE FOR SELF-KNOWLEDGE, POLITICAL JUSTIFICATION AND PUBLIC PHILOSOPHY
title_fullStr ARE WE POST-JUSTIFICATION? STOUT’S CASE FOR SELF-KNOWLEDGE, POLITICAL JUSTIFICATION AND PUBLIC PHILOSOPHY
title_full_unstemmed ARE WE POST-JUSTIFICATION? STOUT’S CASE FOR SELF-KNOWLEDGE, POLITICAL JUSTIFICATION AND PUBLIC PHILOSOPHY
title_sort ARE WE POST-JUSTIFICATION? STOUT’S CASE FOR SELF-KNOWLEDGE, POLITICAL JUSTIFICATION AND PUBLIC PHILOSOPHY
author Burks, Deven
author_facet Burks, Deven
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Burks, Deven
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv 8TH BRAGA MEETINGS ON ETHICS AND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY, WITH GUSTAF ARRHENIUS
topic 8TH BRAGA MEETINGS ON ETHICS AND POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY, WITH GUSTAF ARRHENIUS
description Must the participant to public discourse have knowledge of her beliefs, attitudes and reasons as well as belief-formation processes to have justified political belief? In this paper, we test this question with reference to Jeffrey Stout’s (2004) approach to public discourse and public philosophy. After defining selfknowledge and justification along the lines of James Pryor (2004), we map thereon Stout’s view of public discourse and public philosophy as democratic piety, earnest storytelling and Brandomian expressive rationality. We then lay out Brian Leiter’s (2016) naturalistic critique of public philosophy as “discursive hygiene” to see whether Stoutian public philosophy survives the former’s emotivist-tribalist gauntlet. Lastly, we find that Leiter’s critique proves less radical than it may appear and requires the moderating influence of a public philosophy like Stout’s. All in all, Stoutian public discourse and public philosophy powerfully illustrates a strong, necessary connection between self-knowledge and political justification. Post-truth is not post-justification.
publishDate 2023
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2023-09-26
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://doi.org/10.21814/eps.1.1.55
url https://doi.org/10.21814/eps.1.1.55
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv eng
language eng
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv 2184-2582
2184-2574
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Centre for Ethics, Politics, and Society - ELACH, University of Minho
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Centre for Ethics, Politics, and Society - ELACH, University of Minho
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1799137071281995776