Telling a story in a deliberation: addressing epistemic injustice and the exclusion of indigenous groups in public decision-making
Deliberative scholars have suggested that citizens should be able to exchange arguments in public forums. A key element in this exchange is the rational mode of communication, which means speaking through objective argumentation. However, some feminists argue that this mode of communication may crea...
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | Electronic Article |
Language: | English |
Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
Journals Online & Print: | |
Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
Published: |
Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group
2022
|
In: |
Journal of global ethics
Year: 2022, Volume: 18, Issue: 3, Pages: 368-385 |
Further subjects: | B
Public Policy
B Deliberative process B Storytelling B Indigenous voices B epistemic injustices |
Online Access: |
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
Summary: | Deliberative scholars have suggested that citizens should be able to exchange arguments in public forums. A key element in this exchange is the rational mode of communication, which means speaking through objective argumentation. However, some feminists argue that this mode of communication may create or intensify epistemic injustices. Furthermore, we should not assume that everyone is equally equipped to take part in deliberation. Certain groups, such as Indigenous peoples, for instance, who may not be versed in rational forms of argumentation, may not be listened to or involved sufficiently in the deliberative process. Therefore, it seems we need an alternative mode of communication, such as storytelling, which is a first-person or collective narrative. Given this, how should we pursue this goal? This article aims to answer this question by analysing a local conflict involving an Indigenous tribe and a neighbouring community in Brazil and exploring the underlying testimonial and hermeneutical injustices. I argue that storytelling has an important normative and institutional role in public deliberation and show that its applied version could overcome epistemic injustices and lead to better public policies. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1744-9634 |
Contains: | Enthalten in: Journal of global ethics
|
Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1080/17449626.2022.2117232 |