On Dialogical Reason

Description

‘All fire ants are insects, and all insects are animals, therefore all fire ants are …’ Throughout much of the history of Western philosophy, arguments such as these have been considered monological — reasoning being the work of a single agent — with this conception being epitomized in the deductive form of the syllogism. To this tradition, there has always existed an other: the idea of reason as dialogical, with argumentation conceived of as social, deduction as interactive and proof as an act (Dutilh Novaes 2020, 30-31; Negarestani 2018, 360). Whereas in the first, knowledge, meaning and truth are fixed, in the second, they are the outcome of dynamical interactions between agents (Dutilh Novaes 2015; Trafford 2016).

In the second perspective, dialogue occupies a decisive place in the space of reason — what has been called “the game of giving and asking of reasons” — with each move in the game serving to justify other moves, and those again being justified by yet other moves, with the possibility of the game being played on indefinitely (Brandom 1994, 162). This activity — what Plato once named ‘serious play’ — is neither ahistorical (reason takes time) nor apolitical (justice requires justification). Without critique, reasoning becomes self-confirming, with every inference increasing isolation, conditioning the formation of echo chambers (Albarracin et al. 2022, 2). Yet without axioms, reasoning becomes self-defeating, every justification requiring another, resulting in an infinite regress only halted by Pyrrhonism (Negarestani 2018, 8). Rationality, therefore, requires both genealogical suspicion (unmasking reasons as causes) and rational explication (extracting reasons from causes), giving rise to a “dialectics between suspicion and trust” (Brassier 2016, 98).

Additional information

The aim of this event is to bring together philosophers, artists, historians, logicians, social scientists, mathematicians and every other being interested in discussing the themes described above. The content of the event will be reflected in the form: all presentations will be followed by dialogues, interaction will be favored over exposition, (critical) engagement will be valued, haranguing not appreciated.