Dissent: Good, Bad, and Reasonable

Abstract

Kappel draws a useful distinction between different ways we diagnose dissent. Taking public dissent as his focus, Kappel examines what makes dissent epistemically good or bad, and what makes dissent reasonable or unreasonable. Kappel develops an account of reasonable and unreasonable dissent that is similar to Rawls’s account of reasonable and unreasonable political views, and offers some suggestions for responding to unreasonable dissent. One key conclusion that emerges is that when we diagnose dissent as reasonable or unreasonable we are rarely offering a mere description. More often this diagnosis is meta-level commentary on the manner in which we should treat the instance of dissent in question. Thus, the labeling of dissent as reasonable or unreasonable is itself often a political act.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationVoicing Dissent : The Ethics and Epistemology of Making Disagreement Public
EditorsCasey Rebecca Johnson
Number of pages21
Place of PublicationNew York
PublisherRoutledge
Publication date1 Jan 2018
Pages61-81
ISBN (Print)9781138744288
ISBN (Electronic)9781351721578
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2018
SeriesRoutledge studies in contemporary philosophy

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Dissent: Good, Bad, and Reasonable'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this