Asking before Arguing? Consent in Argumentation (Dr. Kat Stevens, Department of Philosophy)

This event is from the archives of The Notice Board. The event has already taken place and the information contained in this post may no longer be relevant or accurate.

The Department of Philosophy will present the following as part of their colloquium series.

Asking before Arguing? Consent in Argumentation
Speaker:  Dr. Kat Stevens (Department of Philosophy)
Location:  D-633 (University Hall)
Time:  2:00 - 3:30 p.m.

Arguments involve, at minimum, attempts at presenting something that an audience will take to be a
reason. Reasons, once understood, affect an addressee’s beliefs in ways that are outside of their direct voluntary
control. Since such changes may impact the well-being, life projects, or sense of self of the addressee, they risk
infringing upon their autonomy. We call this the “autonomy worry” of argumentation. This paper asks
whether one ought to seek an addressee’s consent before arguing with them. We first consider the view
that arguing of any sort and on any topic requires consent. However, such a view is extreme, and we reject
the general requirement of consent because argument contains its own internal permission structure. We find,
however, that this permission structure is not always operative, and that consent may be morally required in
certain cases.

Everyone is welcome.

Room or Area: 
D-633

Contact:

Bev Garnett | bev.garnett@uleth.ca | (403) 380-1894

Attached Files: