-
Expand entry
-
Added by: Clotilde TorregrossaAbstract:
In cases where structural oppression conditions the broader public sphere, the democratic ideal of a receptive public may be threatened by at least two possible outcomes which appear to undermine its stated goal of increasing understanding of counterhegemonic ideas amongst mainstream, oppressive groups. Either (a) counterhegemonic ideas are defanged to make them sufficiently palatable to a new audience, or (b) counterhegemonic ideas are taken up intact, and as a result the extant networks of publics which depend on oppressive structures and hierarchies will be destroyed. As we will argue, in certain cases of colonialism such as the Straits Philosophical Society in colonial Singapore, the conditions which receptive publics are supposed to ameliorate: (i) the social costs of speech, (ii) inequality of epistemic labour, and (iii) the antagonism between groups, are not only an irreducible feature of counterhegemonic efforts, but are in fact increased in the attempt to maintain receptive publics. However, this may be more a feature than a bug: receptive publics need not be seen only as communicative intermediaries for oppressed groups, but as a possible dialectical step towards new modes of socio-material life.
Comment: Uses discussion in a historical philosophical society to discuss the limits of anti-oppression practices; can be a good example of the role of history in philosophy.
Wilson, Lee, Ashton, Natalie Alana. Receptive Publics in Colonial Contexts: The Case of the Straits Philosophical Society
2025, Topoi 44(3): 719–732
Can’t find it?
Contribute the texts you think should be here and we’ll add them soon!