Antagonism in the Space of Reasons
This article develops a distinctive notion of political commitments that extends Robert Brandom’s inferentialism by drawing on Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe’s theory of hegemony and antagonism. I argue that Brandom and Laclau & Mouffe’s accounts converge in presenting discursivity as a space...
Na minha lista:
| Publicado no: | URI:https://journals.openedition.org/ejpap, |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| Idioma: | Anglais |
| Publicado em: |
European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy
2025
|
| Assuntos: | |
| Acesso em linha: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| Resumo: | This article develops a distinctive notion of political commitments that extends Robert Brandom’s inferentialism by drawing on Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe’s theory of hegemony and antagonism. I argue that Brandom and Laclau & Mouffe’s accounts converge in presenting discursivity as a space of provisional norms without ultimate guarantees. Moreover, both accounts reveal how epistemic authority is asymmetrically distributed. However, I contend that Brandom’s dichotomy between doxastic and practical commitments fails to capture the specific antagonism of political commitments. I also suggest that counter-hegemonic Leftist politics cannot consist in engaging in rational debates. Rather, it requires discursive rearticulation: reframing hegemonic commitments as oppressive and binding together diverse struggles. By politicizing Brandomian inferentialism in this way, I show that the game of giving and asking for reasons is itself structured by antagonism and a struggle for hegemony. |
|---|