Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

The art of democracy—art as a tool for developing democratic citizenship and stimulating public debate: a Rortyan-Deweyan account


Räber, Michael I (2013). The art of democracy—art as a tool for developing democratic citizenship and stimulating public debate: a Rortyan-Deweyan account. Humanities, 2(2):176-192.

Abstract

Richard Rorty holds that the novel is the characteristic genre of democracy, because it helps people to develop and to stabilize two crucial capabilities the ideal inhabitants of democratic societies should possess: a keen sense for anti-foundationalism and a disposition for solidarity. He believes that novels help develop these capabilities by educating our capacity for criticism and our capacity for attentive-empathetic perception. This article argues in favor of this Rortyan idea, showing how anti-foundationalism and solidarity can be seen as important instances of what I will call 'dispositions for democratic citizenship' and that art (and not only novels) and its reception, are valuable tools for advancing these dispositions. However, as the Rortyan public-private dichotomy assigns art’s function of criticism only to the private sphere, Rorty ignores its potential for stimulating democratic public deliberation and he misses the fact that art’s functions of criticism and of attentive-empathetic perception partially depend on each other if they are effectively to lead to increased solidarity and change social realities. Thus this article argues—taking these objections into account—to slightly modify, but nevertheless value Rorty’s idea that art and its reception are crucial resources for democratic citizenship and for the process of democratic deliberation.

Abstract

Richard Rorty holds that the novel is the characteristic genre of democracy, because it helps people to develop and to stabilize two crucial capabilities the ideal inhabitants of democratic societies should possess: a keen sense for anti-foundationalism and a disposition for solidarity. He believes that novels help develop these capabilities by educating our capacity for criticism and our capacity for attentive-empathetic perception. This article argues in favor of this Rortyan idea, showing how anti-foundationalism and solidarity can be seen as important instances of what I will call 'dispositions for democratic citizenship' and that art (and not only novels) and its reception, are valuable tools for advancing these dispositions. However, as the Rortyan public-private dichotomy assigns art’s function of criticism only to the private sphere, Rorty ignores its potential for stimulating democratic public deliberation and he misses the fact that art’s functions of criticism and of attentive-empathetic perception partially depend on each other if they are effectively to lead to increased solidarity and change social realities. Thus this article argues—taking these objections into account—to slightly modify, but nevertheless value Rorty’s idea that art and its reception are crucial resources for democratic citizenship and for the process of democratic deliberation.

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics

Altmetrics

Downloads

285 downloads since deposited on 20 Jun 2013
23 downloads since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:06 Faculty of Arts > Institute of Philosophy
01 Faculty of Theology > Center for Ethics
Dewey Decimal Classification:100 Philosophy
Language:English
Date:2013
Deposited On:20 Jun 2013 11:43
Last Modified:13 Jan 2022 13:29
Publisher:MDPI Publishing
ISSN:2076-0787
OA Status:Gold
Free access at:Publisher DOI. An embargo period may apply.
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.3390/h2020176

Download

Gold Open Access

Download PDF  'The art of democracy—art as a tool for developing democratic citizenship and stimulating public debate: a Rortyan-Deweyan account'.
Preview
Content: Published Version
Filetype: PDF
Size: 77kB
View at publisher
Licence: Creative Commons: Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0)