Desacuerdos profundos : debates y aproximaciones

• Autores: Arroyo, Gustavo; Fairhurst Chilton, Jordi; Lavoreiro, Victoria; Mejía Saldarriaga, Daniel; Tindale, Christopher W.; Vásquez Dávila, Omar
• Año de publicación: 2024
• Idioma: español castellano
• Tipo de recurso: libro
• Materia: Filosofía contemporánea; Lógica; Argumentación; Debate; Retórica; Análisis del discurso; Filosofia Contemporânea; Lógica; Argumentação; Debate; Retórica; Análise do Discurso; Contemporary Philosophy; Logic; Argumentation; Debate; Rhetoric; Discourse Analysis
• Institución: Universidad Nacional de General Sarmiento

Fil: Arroyo, Gustavo. Universidad Nacional de General Sarmiento. Instituto de Ciencias; Argentina.
Muchos desacuerdos del ámbito social son resistentes a la resolución racional. A pesar de intensos y prolongados debates públicos, la argumentación ha sido incapaz en muchos casos de proveer el consenso esperado. Tal es la situación en cuestiones recientemente debatidas sobre identidad personal y derechos (tales como aborto, feminismo y derechos de los homosexuales), política (tales como impuestos, privatización, cuidado de la salud y fomento económico) y ciencia (evolución y cambio climático son ejemplos representativos). El desacuerdo persistente ha sido objeto de investigación en las últimas décadas en diferentes áreas de la ciencia social (especialmente la psicología social y la ciencia política). Los científicos sociales se han interesado predominantemente por explicar los factores sociales y psicológicos que están por detrás de la actual tendencia a la polarización en las sociedades occidentales. Pero el desacuerdo persistente ha suscitado también un interesante conjunto de preguntas filosóficas, entre las cuales la más acuciante es la de si todos los desacuerdos sociales son, en principio, resolubles por medios racionales.
Many social disagreements resist rational resolution. Despite intense and protracted public debates, argumentation has often failed to produce the expected consensus. This is the case with recently debated issues of personal identity and rights (such as abortion, feminism, and gay rights), politics (such as taxation, privatization, healthcare, and economic development), and science (evolution and climate change being prime examples). Persistent disagreement has been the subject of research in recent decades in various areas of social science (especially social psychology and political science). Social scientists have been primarily interested in explaining the social and psychological factors behind the current trend toward polarization in Western societies. But persistent disagreement has also raised an interesting set of philosophical questions, the most pressing of which is whether all social disagreements are, in principle, solvable by rational means.
Many social disagreements resist rational resolution. Despite intense and protracted public debates, argumentation has often failed to produce the expected consensus. This is the case with recently debated issues of personal identity and rights (such as abortion, feminism, and gay rights), politics (such as taxation, privatization, healthcare, and economic development), and science (evolution and climate change being prime examples). Persistent disagreement has been the subject of research in recent decades in various areas of social science (especially social psychology and political science). Social scientists have been primarily interested in explaining the social and psychological factors behind the current trend toward polarization in Western societies. But persistent disagreement has also raised an interesting set of philosophical questions, the most pressing of which is whether all social disagreements are, in principle, solvable by rational means.