Scott Aikin and Robert Talisse discuss the impact of "civility in argument" on democracy. They try to define what is democratic politics is all about (they think it's about "argument". Sure, democracy is not about violence but I'd argue the writers make the mistake of assuming democracy is about "reasoned argumentation"), list the elements of "civility" either in substance (conflict aversion and compromise) or tone (hostile language and demonizing the other side) and in general, try to articulate why we argue. Excerpt:
Let me wrap-up this post with the paragraph on "tone" with special dedication to Abu-Hamed and El-Eryan:
Image: Galileo facing the Roman
Inquisition, painting by Cristiano Banti.
