Poisoning the Well and Epistemic Privilege |
| |
Authors: | Ben Kotzee |
| |
Institution: | (1) Department of Social Policy and Education, Birkbeck College, University of London, 26 Russell Square, London, WC1B 5DQ, UK |
| |
Abstract: | In this paper, a challenge is outlined for Walton’s recent analysis of the fallacy of poisoning the well. An example of the
fallacy in action during a debate on affirmative action on a South African campus is taken to raise the question of how Walton’s
analysis squares with the idea that disadvantaged parties in debates about race may be “epistemically privileged”. It is asked
when the background of a participant is relevant to a debate and it is proposed that a proper analysis of the poisoning the
well will outline conditions under which making one participant’s background an issue in a debate would be legitimate and
illegitimate. Expanding Walton’s analysis to deal with the challenge, it is concluded that calling into question a participant’s
suitability to take part in a debate is never legitimate when it is based simply on a broad fact about their background (like
their race or gender). |
| |
Keywords: | |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|