Suchergebnisse

If we are living in a "post-fact" age, how are we best to conceive of public discourse? Must one either futilely shout the facts louder and louder or must one turn away from facts, and thus rational discourse, altogether? This article defends a model of dialogue that shows a way to engage others in public discourse that avoids the facts versus violence dilemma and thus may prove more effective than deliberative strategies particularly in polarized situations. Drawing on Dewey, Plato, and Arendt, I argue that when citizens engage in dialogue as a noncontentious exchange about issues that matter to them, facts can recover their meaning. As a result, participants will feel less isolated and more empowered, and can be better prepared to engage in productive deliberative exchanges. Dialogue is a form of civic discourse that acknowledges our human condition of finitude and promotes a robust democratic pluralism.

Some feminists have criticized Judith Butler's theory of performativity for providing an insufficient account of agency. In this article I first defend her against such charges by appealing to two themes central to Hans‐Georg Gadamer's hermeneutics. I compare her emphasis on the sociohistorical nature of agency with Gadamer's insistence on the historical nature of knowledge, and I examine the significance Butler assigns to repetition and note its affinities with Gadamer's conception of play. In the final part of the article I argue that in spite of providing an adequate account of agency, Butler's theory of performativity provides no way to allow us to evaluate performances. I show how Gadamer's account of festival, which builds on his concept of play, is useful in helping us make sense of how we might delineate true from false performances, and thus identities.