Metaethical value pluralism is the claim that there are many equally fundamental values that matter for normative choice, rather than one fundamental value. Deliberative democracy is an ideal from political theory stating that respectful, reasoned communicative contestations between free and equal citizens about the relative merits of policies is preferable to mere majoritarian voting. At first glance, both claims go together well. However, several theorists argue that they are incompatible: Value pluralists cannot be deliberative democrats, and deliberative democrats cannot be value pluralists. The argument rests on the supposition that plural fundamental values preclude a common standard of comparison that allows for weighing off different values, thereby rendering deliberation about value conflicts pointless. I argue that this supposition is implausible: Plural fundamental values can be rationally compared. The key is to conceive of the relevant standard as less fundamental than the values at stake. I conclude that value pluralists can remain neutral on the issue of deliberative democracy and that deliberative democrats can and should be value pluralists.
This paper examines the concept of rape through the lenses of epistemic injustice, social ontology, and conceptual engineering, arguing that entrenched rape myths and historically privileged meaningmaking render the operative concept of rape systematically distorted. The authors propose diagnosing these distortions via conceptual and ontological analysis and outline an ameliorative agenda that (a) revises both manifest (legal) and operative (everyday) concepts and (b) enriches the surrounding conceptual vocabulary to better capture the diversity of experiences of sexual harm. The paper positions this framework as a novel bridge between recent meta-ontological work and feminist philosophy on hermeneutical injustice, aiming to guide future theoretical and practical improvements.
Aging with a transformative illness such as dementia is – due to a progress of cognitive and sensory losses – often referenced and symbolized as “the social death”. Such a predominantly cognitive view posits a challenge to those affected and to those who care for people with dementia. In contrast to this disruptive view, an embodied and relational account of dementia stresses levels of the pre-reflective and relational self that allow for engaging with the world and attuning to the other through various bodily senses. By referring to case studies of multisensory engagement (e.g. Validation, Snoezelen) I show how states of well-being can emerge by turning to someone’s affective identity through body memory, interbodily resonance and therapeutic atmospheres, thereby constituting a synaesthetic responsivity. I argue that multisensory engagement contributes to participatory bodily sense-making and well-being within situations of existential crisis, providing possibilities for the “disoriented” self in dementia.
We acknowledge funding from Next Generation EU, in the context of the National Recovery and Resilience Plan, Investment PE8 – Project Age-It: “Ageing Well in an Ageing Society” [DM 1557 11.10.2022]. The views and opinions expressed are those of the authors only and do not necessarily reflect those of the European Union or the European Commission. Neither the European Union nor the European Commission can be held responsible for them. This resource was co-financed by the Next Generation EU.
This contribution examines the relevance of the concept “limit situation” in relation to aging and old age in a geriatric psychotherapy setting. The idea is to bring together concepts from phenomenology and the philosophy of age with methods from the field of qualitative social research. Experiences of groundlessness are viewed through the lens of Karl Jaspers’ terminology, leading to conceptualizing a dynamic of stabilizing beliefs yielding in the context of aging and old age. The results promise to contribute to psychotherapy research and explore new ways for employing phenomenological ideas in clinical practice and research.
