Marshaling Normative Pragmatic Force to Secure Autonomy

Beth Innocenti University of Kansas

Abstract

ABSTRACT Speakers’ autonomy as arguers is impaired when they are not recognized as arguers, they can’t get their arguments heard, and their arguments are ignored, dismissed, or used against them. How do speakers cultivate conditions to secure their autonomy as arguers? This article submits that they marshal normative pragmatic force or the practical efficacy of normative materials. To support this claim, this article explains what speakers’ autonomy as arguers comprises. The article then describes three legitimate sources of force in arguing and characteristic approaches to addressing conditions that interfere with legitimate sources of force. Finally, this article explains how arguers marshal normative pragmatic force to cultivate conditions to secure autonomy for all.

Journal
Philosophy & Rhetoric
Published
2024-12-02
DOI
10.5325/philrhet.57.3.0290
Open Access
Closed

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

Cites in this index (2)

  1. Philosophy & Rhetoric
  2. Philosophy & Rhetoric
Also cites 30 works outside this index ↓
  1. “They Can’t Be Believed: Children, Intersectionality, and Epistemic Injustice.”
    Journal of Global Ethics  
  2. “Adversality and Argumentation.”
    Informal Logic  
  3. “Black Women’s Perspectives on Structural Racism across the Reproductive Lifespan: A Conc…
    Maternal and Child Health Journal  
  4. “Deliberative Speech Acts: An Interactional Approach.”
    Language and Communication  
  5. “Preaching to the Converted: Why Argue When Everyone Agrees?”
    Argumentation  
  6. “Epistemic Injustice: A Role for Recognition?”
    Philosophy and Social Criticism  
  7. “Comments on ‘Rhetoric and Dialectic from the Standpoint of Normative Pragmatics.’”
    Argumentation  
  8. Ethics and Practice in Science Communication
  9. “The Pragmatic Force of Making an Argument.”
    Topoi  
  10. “Belief, Values, and the Will.”
    Dialogue: Canadian Philosophical Review  
  11. “‘I Said What I Said’—Black Women and Argumentative Politeness Norms.”
    Informal Logic  
  12. “Adversarial Argument, Belief Change, and Vulnerability.”
    Topoi  
  13. “Demanding a Halt to Metadiscussions.”
    Argumentation  
  14. “Cultivating Contexts for Deliberative Argumentation.”
    Journal of Argumentation in Context  
  15. “Reason-Giving and the Natural Normativity of Argumentation.”
    Topoi  
  16. “Rhetoric and Dialectic from the Standpoint of Normative Pragmatics.”
    Argumentation  
  17. “Reducing Exclusionary Attitudes through Interpersonal Conversation: Evidence from Three …
    American Political Science Review  
  18. “Presumptions and the Distribution of Argumentative Burdens in Acts of Proposing and Accusing.”
    Argumentation  
  19. “A Normative Pragmatic Theory of Exhorting.”
    Argumentation  
  20. Kukla, Rebecca. 2014. “Performative Force, Convention, and Discursive Injustice.”Hypatia29 (2): 440–57. https…
  21. Relational Autonomy: Feminist Perspectives on Autonomy, Agency, and the Social Self
  22. “Norms of Presentational Force.”
    Argumentation and Advocacy  
  23. “Goals in Argumentation: A Proposal for the Analysis and Evaluation of Public Political A…
    Argumentation  
  24. “Why Argue? Toward a Cost-Benefit Analysis of Argumentation.”
    Argument and Computation  
  25. “Racism and Women’s Studies.”
    Frontiers: A Journal of Women’s Studies  
  26. “Countering Fallacious Moves.”
    Argumentation  
  27. “Language Ideology and Identity Construction in Public Educational Meetings.”
    Journal of International and Intercultural Communication  
  28. “Why We Need Skepticism in Argument: Skeptical Engagement as a Requirement for Epistemic …
    Argumentation  
  29. “Dialogue Theory for Critical Thinking.”
    Argumentation  
  30. Democracy and Difference: Contesting Boundaries of the Political
CrossRef global citation count: 0 View in citation network →