Abstract
AbstractPublic arguments can be good or bad not only as a matter of logic, but also in the sense that speakers can do good or bad things with arguments. For example, hate speakers use public arguments to contribute to the subordination of their targets. But how can ordinary speakers acquire the authority to perform subordinating speech acts? This is the ‘Authority Problem’. This paper defends a solution inspired by McGowan’s (Australas J Philos 87:389–407, 2009) analysis of oppressive speech, including against concerns raised by McGowan (Just words: On speech and hidden harm, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2019) herself. A deflated kind of authority can be gained from the hate speaker’s standing in a norm-governed ‘activity of oppression’. We should be wary about engaging with such speakers in public argument. Even if we counter their arguments, we may still elevate their standing within that activity and so enable them to perform more pernicious speech acts than was previously possible.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference46 articles.
1. Austin JL (1975) How to do things with words, 2nd edn. Oxford University Press, Oxford
2. Barnes MR (2016) Speaking with (subordinating) authority. Soc Theory Pract 42(2):240–257
3. Barnes MR (forthcoming) Presupposition and Propaganda: A Socially Extended Analysis. In: Caponetto L, Labinaz P (eds) Sbisà on Speech as Action. Palgrave Macmillan, London
4. Bauer N (2015) How to do things with pornography. Harvard University Press
5. Bianchi C (2014) The speech acts account of derogatory epithets: some critical notes. In: Dutant J, Fassio D, Meylan A (eds) Liber Amicorum Pascal Engel. University of Geneva, Geneva, pp 465–480