The fog of debate

Social Philosophy and Policy 38 (2):91-110 (2021)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The fog of war—poor intelligence about the enemy—can frustrate even a well-prepared military force. Something similar can happen in intellectual debate. What I call the *fog of debate* is a useful metaphor for grappling with failures and dysfunctions of argumentative persuasion that stem from poor information about our opponents. It is distressingly easy to make mistakes about our opponents’ thinking, as well as to fail to comprehend their understanding of and reactions to our arguments. After describing the fog of debate and outlining its sources in cognition and communication, I consider a few policies we might adopt upon learning we are in this fog.

Other Versions

No versions found

Analytics

Added to PP
2021-11-07

Downloads
948 (#26,037)

6 months
146 (#37,391)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Nathan Ballantyne
Arizona State University

Citations of this work

Science Communication, Paternalism, and Spillovers.Hrishikesh Joshi - forthcoming - Canadian Journal of Philosophy:1-15.

Add more citations

References found in this work

Echo chambers and epistemic bubbles.C. Thi Nguyen - 2020 - Episteme 17 (2):141-161.
What do philosophers believe?David Bourget & David J. Chalmers - 2014 - Philosophical Studies 170 (3):465-500.
Principia Ethica.George Edward Moore - 1903 - International Journal of Ethics 14 (3):377-382.
On Evidence in Philosophy.William G. Lycan - 2019 - New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
Evidence.Thomas Kelly - 2006 - Philosophy Compass.

View all 15 references / Add more references