Open for Debate

What is Closed-Mindedness?

Posted on 20 November 2017 by Heather Battaly

On March 7 2017, Jason Chaffetz who was then a member of the US House of Representatives (R-Utah) told a CNN anchor: “Americans have choices….rather than getting that new iPhone…they should invest…in their own health care. They’ve got to make those decisions for themselves.”[1] Later the same day, in a discussion of the Affordable Care Act
Read more


How Empathy Inhibits Trust

Posted on 6 November 2017 by Olivia Bailey

In my previous blog post, “How empathy promotes trust,” I argued that empathy can furnish an important source of trust in other people’s testimony (testifying simply being the act of inviting people to take your word for it that something or other is true). I also mentioned that this positive relation of support is not
Read more


How Empathy Promotes Trust

Posted on 23 October 2017 by Olivia Bailey

In the aftermath of the Dallas shootings on July 7, 2016, Hillary Clinton said: “We need to try as best we can to walk in one another’s shoes, to imagine what it would feel like if people followed us around stores or locked their car doors when we walked past.” Clinton was calling for a familiar
Read more


Bad Questions Lead to Bad Democracy

Posted on 9 October 2017 by Lani Watson

In a previous post, I discussed the essential role that questions play in the political landscape of contemporary democracy. The ability to ask questions, and to ask good ones at that, facilitates participation in political discussion and debate, allows us to gather information that speaks to our concerns, and those of our communities, and enables
Read more


Good Democracy Needs Good Questions

Posted on 25 September 2017 by Lani Watson

“If you were president, what would you do about Syria and the humanitarian crisis in Aleppo?” This question was asked to both candidates at the second U.S. presidential debate, during the run-up to the 2016 presidential election. As per the ‘town-hall’ format of the debate, the question was asked by a member of the public,
Read more


The Ethics of Linguistic Plurality

Posted on 11 September 2017 by Matteo Bonotti

A guest post from co-authors Matteo Bonotti (Cardiff University) and Yael Peled (McGill University) How we think about language tends to significantly influence, if not shape, how we think about the political ethics of language, namely how we theorize language when considering the empirical and normative dimensions of political life.
Read more


The Vices of Truthlessness

Posted on 28 August 2017 by Charlie Crerar

From ‘post-truth’, to ‘fake news’, to ‘alternative facts’, truthlessness is everywhere at the moment. These phenomena present us with a huge array of questions. How do we separate fact from fiction? How can we tell which sources of information are credible? Is there even such a thing as objective truth?
Read more


Arguing Virtuously

Posted on 14 August 2017 by Andrew Aberdein

I recently found out that I had been collecting books by accident. Rearranging some shelves, I discovered I had several books with similar titles, all acquired at different times, and for different reasons, but with a strikingly similar theme: Winning Arguments; How to Win An Argument; How to Win Every Argument; The Art of Always
Read more


Hubris as Prime Ministerial Vice

Posted on 31 July 2017 by Ian Kidd

When Theresa May’s snap election backfired decimating her majority, many commentators were quick to use a language of vices to describe her errors. ‘May’s astounding arrogance has now paved the way for another General Election’, complained the Independent, echoing attacks by the Guardian and Mirror of the various forms of arrogance in the Prime Minister’s
Read more



Rallying the troops versus quieting the indignation

Posted on 3 July 2017 by Gregory Maio

A new National Rifle Association (NRA) video advertisement in the United States sparked controversy this week. Critics indicated that the emotive ad barely falls short of calling for violent action against liberals, while further diminishing the potential for productive dialogue between left-wing and right-wing advocates.
Read more


What we’ve got here is failure to communicate

Posted on 19 June 2017 by Mark Alfano

Debate is a social process of interactive communication. We can distinguish at least four roles associated with parties to a debate. First, there are the debaters themselves — at least two of them, but possibly more. Second, there is the moderator of the debate. Third, there are the partisan audiences affiliated with each debater. Fourth,
Read more


Collaboration versus point scoring

Posted on 5 June 2017 by Alessandra Tanesini

Last Monday we held the first workshop associated with the project Changing Attitudes in Public Debate. The workshop was by invitation and designed to bring together some philosophers, social psychologists and linguists that analyse the verbal and non-verbal aspects of conversations.
Read more