Abstract
AbstractOne way to silence the powerless, Langton has taught us, is to pre-emptively disable their ability to do things with words. In this paper I argue that speakers can be silenced in a different way. You can let them speak, and obscure the meaning of their words afterwards. My aim is to investigate this form of silencing, that I call retroactive distortion. In a retroactive distortion, the meaning of the words of a speaker is distorted by the effect of a subsequent speech act by a different speaker. After introducing this notion, I explore some reasons why retroactive distortions can be difficult to challenge and argue that, besides constituting a communicative injustice, they can eliminate topics from public consideration and therefore erode public debate.
Funder
Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación
Universidad Nacional de Educacion Distancia
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference22 articles.
1. Anderson L (2017) Epistemic injustice and the philosophy of race. In: Medina J, Kidd I, Pohlhaus Jr G (eds) The Routledge handbook of epistemic injustice. Routledge, London
2. Brown É (2018) Propaganda, misinformation, and the epistemic value of democracy. Crit Rev 30(3–4):194–218
3. Caponetto L, Cepollaro B (ms.) Bending as Counterspeech
4. Carassa A, Colombetti M (2009) Joint Meaning. J Pragmat 41(9):1837–1854
5. Cohen J (1989) Deliberation and democratic legitimacy. In: Hamlin A, Pettit P (eds) The good polity: normative analysis of the state. Blackwell, Oxford, pp 17–34