Location
Room 3
Document Type
Paper
Keywords
Dialectical theory, Fallacies, Generalizations, Metadialogue, Normative pragmatics, #NotAllMen, Systemic sexism
Start Date
3-6-2020 2:00 PM
End Date
3-6-2020 3:00 PM
Abstract
How can social actors halt retreats to metadialogues that involve nit-picking or unwarranted charges, and why can they expect the strategies to work? Krabbe (2003) has proposed a dialectical regulation designed to forestall or halt retreats from ground-level discussions to metadialogues: paying the costs of the metadialogue. I argue that this dialectical regulation deserves to be taken seriously because it is realistic and encompasses a range of strategies that ordinary social actors take as reasonable.
Previous Versions
Reader's Reactions
Susan L. Kline, Comment on Beth Innocenti’s “Paying a Cost of Metadialogue: Reasonable Observations and Another Example on Handling Unwarranted Retreats to Metadialogue” (June 2020)
Included in
Halting retreats to metadialogues
Room 3
How can social actors halt retreats to metadialogues that involve nit-picking or unwarranted charges, and why can they expect the strategies to work? Krabbe (2003) has proposed a dialectical regulation designed to forestall or halt retreats from ground-level discussions to metadialogues: paying the costs of the metadialogue. I argue that this dialectical regulation deserves to be taken seriously because it is realistic and encompasses a range of strategies that ordinary social actors take as reasonable.
