Location
University of Windsor
Document Type
Paper
Start Date
3-6-2009 9:00 AM
End Date
6-6-2009 5:00 PM
Abstract
The aim of this paper is to extend Miranda Fricker’s conception of testimonial injustice to what I call “argumentative injustice”: those cases where an arguer’s social identity brings listeners to place too little or too much credibility in an argument. My recommendation is to put in place a type of indirect “affirmative action” plan for argument evaluation. I also situate my proposal in Johnson (2000)’s framework of argumentation as an exercise in manifest rationality.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Response to Submission
John E. Fields, Commentary on Bondy
Reader's Reactions
John E. Fields, Commentary on Bondy (June 2009)
Included in
When Reasons Don’t Work
University of Windsor
The aim of this paper is to extend Miranda Fricker’s conception of testimonial injustice to what I call “argumentative injustice”: those cases where an arguer’s social identity brings listeners to place too little or too much credibility in an argument. My recommendation is to put in place a type of indirect “affirmative action” plan for argument evaluation. I also situate my proposal in Johnson (2000)’s framework of argumentation as an exercise in manifest rationality.
