Abstract

Sometimes we are faced with discussions in which we might think that one or more of our interlocutors should not be partaking in the argument. Sometimes we are faced with discussions where we are unfairly denied participation, or we recognise that some arguers are denied participation. This paper develops an account and typology of ‘argumentative exclusion’. We understand ‘argumentative exclusion’ as the denial of participation in a discussion because of different phenomena. In this paper, we distinguish between argumentative exclusions that are unwarranted and argumentative exclusions that are in service of justice and resistance to social oppression. Online argumentation and online hate speech form the core examples of this work.