Location
Room 2
Document Type
Commentary
Keywords
charity, Govier, moral, principle of charity
Start Date
3-6-2020 2:01 PM
End Date
3-6-2020 3:00 PM
Abstract
There are a variety of important and insightful points in Stevens’ essay for argument theorists and teachers of logic and critical thinking. The interplay between morality, epistemology, and metaphysics for instance that underlie reason and argumentation. The important point that arguers and their interlocuters, when representing reasons, are doing something fundamentally human and their identity as knowers should be respected as part of a reasoning community. The equally important point that epistemic imperialism is a risk of toxic charity when an arguer with more social power and privilege, presumes to interpret an interlocuter on the social margins (who may have less power but greater epistemic advantages). In addition to these insights and contributions, I have just a few points for further consideration that might help develop Stevens’ argument even further.
Response to Submission
Katharina Stevens, Principle of Charity as a Moral Requirement in Non-Institutionalized Argumentation
Included in
Commentary: Notes on Katharina Stevens essay "Charity for Moral Reasons"
Room 2
There are a variety of important and insightful points in Stevens’ essay for argument theorists and teachers of logic and critical thinking. The interplay between morality, epistemology, and metaphysics for instance that underlie reason and argumentation. The important point that arguers and their interlocuters, when representing reasons, are doing something fundamentally human and their identity as knowers should be respected as part of a reasoning community. The equally important point that epistemic imperialism is a risk of toxic charity when an arguer with more social power and privilege, presumes to interpret an interlocuter on the social margins (who may have less power but greater epistemic advantages). In addition to these insights and contributions, I have just a few points for further consideration that might help develop Stevens’ argument even further.
