Testimony as Political Argument

• Authors: SZALAY MÁTYÁS
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

On the one hand, when compared with the ‘original meaning’ of politics in the Classical or Christian thought, contemporary liberal democracies in general understand politics in a reduced sense. On the other hand, however, democratic debates constantly allow for opening new horizons of interpreting politics. One way to radically renew politics is accepting authentic testimonies as political arguments. To illustrate this point, I offer the reflective analysis of a concrete case concerning the hotly debated topic of migrants in Europe: a Benedictine monastery receives and hosts illegal migrants in Hungary. This example deserves our interest for – when not tendentiously misinterpreted – it can neither be classified as an argument of the conservative approach to migrants nor does it support the liberal reading of the events. It implies, at the same time, a positive and a negative critique to both approaches by simply going beyond the usual political categories. In order to see how testimony works as a political argument I undertake three steps: 1) Instead of defining testimony, I show through a phenomenological analysis three characteristics of the given example that are both, essential and relevant for political discourse: a) the essentially indeterminate meaning of testimony; b) self-exposure and self-sacrifice; c) the particular political message of authentic testimony. In the next step, I offer a brief analysis of contemporary political discourse to highlight those aspects concerning which authentic testimonies may transform the meaning of politics: a) mediatization; b) lack of authenticity and credibility; c) technical scientific language; d) impersonal approach to political issues. As a third step, I unite these two analysis by asking what counts as a political argument in general and whether and how testimonies can function as political arguments. In my conclusion, I distinguish two types of politics according to their attitude towards testimony: one that is open to authentic testimonies and one that rejects them. By showing some fatal consequences of the latter option I argue for recovering some of politics’ original meaning.

Keywords

EN

testimony; politics; religion; value; immigrants

• Publisher: Akademia Pedagogiki Specjalnej im. Marii Grzegorzewskiej. Wydawnictwo APS
• Journal: Studies in Global Ethics and Global Education
• Year: 2016
• Issue: 5
• Pages: 72-92

Dates

published

2016-08-25

Contributors

author

SZALAY MÁTYÁS

• The Institute of Philosophy “Edith Stein”

References

• Adler, Jonathan (2015). Epistemological Problems of Testimony. In: E.N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved from: http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2015/entries/testimony-episprob/ (10.05.2016).
• Agamben, G. (1998). Homo Sacer: Sovereign Power and Bare Life, Stanford: Stanford University Press.
• Agustín, S. (1957). De doctrina christiana. Obras de San Agustín, 15. Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos.
• Arendt, H. (1973). The Origins of Totalitarianism. Orlando: Harcourt.
• Augustine, S. (2014). Confessiones, Mediatrix Press.
• Augustine, S. (1945). De civitate dei (vol. 2). London: JM Dent & Sons Ltd.
• Cavanaugh, W. T. (2009). The Myth of Religious Violence: Secular Ideology and the Roots of Modern Conflict. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Cavanaugh, W. T. (2011). Migrations of the Holy: God, State, and the Political Meaning of the Church. Grand Rapids: William B. Eerdmans Publishing.
• Dulong, R. (1999). Le témoin oculaire. Les conditions sociales de l'attestation personnelle. Mots, 59(1), 138-140.
• Esposito, R. (2006). Categorías de lo impolítico, Buenos Aires: Katz.
• Givoni, M. (2011). Witnessing/Testimony. Mafte’akh. Lexical Review of Political Thought, 2e, 147-169. Retrieved from: http://mafteakh.tau.ac.il/en/issue-2e-winter-2011/witnessingtestimony/ (10.05.2016).
• Govier, T. (1993). When Logic Meets Politics: Testimony, Distrust, and Rhetorical Disadvantage. Informal Logic, 15(2), 93-104.
• Habermas, J. (1985). The Theory of Communicative Action Volume 2: Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason, Boston: Beacon Press.
• Hildebrandt, D. von. (2005). El corazón. Un análisis de la afectividad humana y divina. Madrid: Palabra.
• Hume, D. (1977). An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, Indianapolis: Hackett.
• John Paul II. (1988). Christifideles laici. Retrieved from: http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/apost_exhortations/documents/hf_jp-ii_exh_30121988_christifideles-laici.html (10.05.2016).
• Lackey, J. (2008). Learning from words: Testimony as a source of knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Marshall, R. (2013). On Testimony: Interview with Jennifer Lackey. 3:AM Magazine. Retrieved from: http://www.3ammagazine.com/3am/on-testimony/ (10.05.2016).
• Mazzoleni, G., Schulz, W. (1999). Mediatization of Politics: A Challenge for Democracy? Political Communication, 16(3), 247-261.
• Moine, I. de. (2009). El ordo amoris como principio inspirador del pensamiento personalista. Veritas, 4(21), 267-286.
• Molnar, T. (1992). L'hégémonie libérale. Lausanne: L'Age d'Homme.
• Moore, G.E., Baldwin, T. (1993). Principia ethica. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Oppenheim, F. E. (1973). “Facts” and “Values” in Politics: Are They Separable? Political Theory, 1(1), 54-68. Theory, 1(1), 54-68.
• Putnam, H. (2002). The Collapse of the Fact/Value Dichotomy and Other Essays. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Putnam, R.A. (1998). Perceiving facts and values. Philosophy, 73(1), 5-19.
• Rawls, J. (2009). A theory of Justice, Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
• Reid, T. (1983). Inquiry and Essays, Indianapolis: Hackett Publishing Company
• Ricoeur, P. (1995). Oneself as Another, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
• Scheler, M. (1954-97). Ordo amoris. In: Gesammelte Werke, vol. X. Bern: Bouvier.
• Yúdice, G. (1996). Testimonio and Postmodernism. In: G.M. Gugelberger. (ed.). The Real Thing:
• Testimonial Discourse and Latin America, Durham: Duke University Press.

Identifiers

DOI

DOI: 10.5604/23920890.1215490