Sometimes, a form of discrimination is hard to register,
understand, and articulate. A rich precedent demonstrates
how victim testimonies have been key in uncovering such
“hidden” forms of discrimination, from sexual harassment to
microaggressions. I reflect on how this plausibly goes too for
“attentional discrimination”, referring to cases where the
more meaningful attributes of one social group are made
salient in attention in contrast to the less meaningful attributes
of another. Victim testimonies understandably dominate
the “context-of-discovery” stage of research into these
initially opaque forms of discrimination; a victim’s encounter
with the gap between their experience and dominant conceptual
frameworks for understanding it is what provides an
initial foothold for analysis to begin. Some object, however,
to this methodology continuing to dominate the later “context-of-justification”
stage, where the hypothesis is rigorously
challenged. I argue that this objection underestimates not
just how other methodologies are more likely to inherit the
various mechanisms of invisibility hiding the discrimination
in question, but also how victim testimonies are distinctively
well-suited to recognize and challenge those mechanisms.
Victim testimonies, then, ought to continue playing
a dominant role into these later stages of research regarding
hidden forms of discrimination.
The Colonizer and the Colonized
A Jew born in Tunisia, Memmi (1920–2020) rose to fame with The Colonizer and The Colonized, prefaced by Sartre. Educated in Tunisia, Algeria, and France, he settled in Paris, where he wrote novels and essays alike. His main topics include colonialism, the Jewish condition, and Tunisia.
An early theorist of decolonization, he used a sociological approach, getting to psycho-sociology, working through portraits—the original title of the book is Portrait of the Colonized, Preceded by Portrait of the Colonizer—trying to describe “rendings of the spirit” as “introjections of social conflicts“, according to Sartre in his preface.
Published in 1957, this work aims to show the interweaving of the colonizer’s and the colonized’s mind, clearly sketched out by the binary structure of the essay.
Memmi starts with the economic aspect of colonization, describing how the fundamental inequality of colonization gives the colonizer a much more favorable material situation. One of his key theses is the interdependence of the colonizer and the colonized, trying to go beyond Marxism and psychoanalysis. He characterizes the consciousness of the colonizer through three discoveries: “profit, privilege, and usurpation“. To this duality, he adds several third parties: nationals of other countries, assimilated minorities, Jews, colonized participating in the colonial administration, etc, giving a vivid account of the entanglement between both subjectivity and objective structures, and colonizer and colonized.
Responsibility for Justice
When the noted political philosopher Iris Marion Young died in 2006, her death was mourned as the passing of “one of the most important political philosophers of the past quarter-century” (Cass Sunstein) and as an important and innovative thinker working at the conjunction of a number of important topics: global justice; democracy and difference; continental political theory; ethics and international affairs; and gender, race and public policy. This book discusses our responsibilities to address “structural” injustices in which we among many are implicated (but for which we are not to blame), often by virtue of participating in a market, such as buying goods produced in sweatshops, or participating in booming housing markets that leave many homeless. The book argues that addressing these structural injustices requires a new model of responsibility, which it calls the “social connection” model. The book develops this idea by clarifying the nature of structural injustice; developing the notion of political responsibility for injustice and how it differs from older ideas of blame and guilt; and finally how we can then use this model to describe our responsibilities to others no matter who we are and where we live.
Considerations on Logical Consequence and Natural Language
In a recent article, “Logical Consequence and Natural Language”, Michael Glanzberg claims that there is no relation of logical consequence in natural language (2015). The present paper counters that claim. I shall discuss Glanzberg’s arguments and show why they don’t hold. I further show how Glanzberg’s claims may be used to rather support the existence of logical consequence in natural language.
Structures of Matter and Patterns in Science
Inspired by the work and life of Dorothy Wrinch, 1894-1976. The proceedings of a symposium held at Smith College, Northampton, Massachusetts, September 28-30, 1977 and selected papers of Dorothy Wrinch, from the Sophia Smith Collection.
On the Structure of Scientific Inquiry
The object of this paper is the study, in some of its aspects, of the structure of scientific inquiry. The subject is a large one and covers the major part of the field of scientific methodology. We shall confine our attention more particularly to the consideration of those problems of scientific structure which occur in the case of more advanced sciences and merely outline the corresponding problems which occur primarily in sciences in the more elementary stage
Modalities: Philosophical Essays
This book is a collection of papers by Ruth Barcan Marcus, covering much ground in the development of her thought, and spanning from 1961 to 1990. Many of the papers deal with logical, semantic, metaphysical, and epistemological issues in intensional logic, and in particular, modalities. Some important themes that run through these papers are extensionality, the necessity of identity, the directly referential conception of proper names as “tags,” essentialism, substitutional quantification, and possibilia and possible worlds. What emerges from them is a robust defense of quantified modal logic in the light of a host of objections, particularly from Quine. Modalities also includes two papers on belief, which have consequences for epistemic logic and more widely for theories of rationality; two papers on ethical issues, which have consequences for deontic logic and practical reasoning; and finally, two papers on historical figures, Spinoza and Russell, dealing with the ontological proof of God’s existence, and the nature of particularity, identity, and individuation, respectively.
Chao Lun: The Treatises of Seng-chao
The Chao Lun (ca. 400 CE) is the main philosophical work of the Chinese Buddhist monk Sēngzhào, a student of Kumārajīva who first translated major Buddhist philosophical works like those of Nāgārjuna into Chinese. Sēngzhào develops a metaphysical conception of time according to which time is not real. What instead exists are an array of entirely static worlds – “time slices” in modern parlance (Sēngzhào’s views are an early example of a “B-theory” of time). Our selves are being moved from one world to the next, creating an illusion of progression and things like causation. For Sēngzhào, enlightenment can be found by simply remaining in the present, not moving on to the next state. Sēngzhào leans both on Buddhist and on Daoist influences, but also develops an epistemologically less radical view in chapter 3 that, unlike those of Nāgārjuna and Zhuangzi, cannot be associated with skepticism.
Epistemic Trouble for Engineering ‘Woman’
This paper puts forth a functionalist difficulty for Sally Haslanger’s proposal for engineering our concept of ‘woman.’ It is argued that the project of bringing about better political function fulfillment cannot get off the ground in virtue of epistemic failure.
Political Rioting: A Moral Assessment
Avia Pasternak offers a moral assessment of political rioting, focusing on cases like the riots over the police killing of Freddie Gray in Baltimore in 2015 and the 2005 French Banlieu riots. As she notes, there are two common responses to such cases: that rioters are just the same as common criminals, or that rioters are morally worse than common criminals. In response, Pasternak develops an analysis of political rioting as a form of “spontaneous, disorganized, public collective violence in order to protest against and to defy [the] political order” (2). In her view, political rioting ought to be understood as a form of defensive harm–harm inflicted in order to avert an attack, as in justified cases of self-defence or just wars. Those who engage in political rioting, Pasternak argues, “do so in order to bring an end, or at least to ameliorate their on-going unjust treatment at the hands of their state. It follows then that in determining the appropriate moral response to rioters, we ought to examine their actions in light of the various constraints offered by just war theorists” (3). Pasternak focuses on three such constraints: necessity, success, and proportionality. And she argues that, objections to the contrary notwithstanding, “under circumstances that are not far from those we find in some real-world democracies, the resort to political rioting can comply with the criteria of permissible defensive harm” (4).