Theories of assertion must explain how silencing is possible. This chapter defends an account of assertion in terms of normative commitments on the grounds that it provides the most plausible analysis of how individuals might be silenced when attempting to make assertions. The chapter first offers an account of the nature of silencing and defends the view that it can occur even in contexts where speakers’ communicative intentions are understood by their audience. Second, it outlines some of the normative commitments (...) characteristic of assertion when used in the speech act of telling;. This commitment view of assertion is then used to explain silencing as a matter of being deprived of the ability to make some of the commitments one is trying to acquire. Finally, the main rivals of the commitment view of assertion endorsed here are shown to be unable to account for silencing, at least when they are considered in their purest form. (shrink)

Testimonial injustice occurs when hearers attribute speakers a credibility deficit because of an identity prejudice and consequently dismiss speakers’ testimonial assertions. Various philosophers explain testimonial injustice by appealing to interpersonal norms arising within testimonial exchanges. When conversational participants violate these interpersonal norms, they generate second-personal epistemic harms, harming speakers as epistemic agents. This focus on testimony, however, neglects how systematically misevaluating speakers’ knowledge affects conversational participants more generally. When hearers systematically misevaluate speakers’ conversational competence because of entrenched assumptions about what (...) speakers know, I call these conversational epistemic injustices. I argue the same epistemic harm in testimonial injustice arises for non-assertoric speech acts, generating conversational epistemic injustices. For across speech acts, deflated knowledge attributions create second-personal harms that prevent speakers from using their knowledge in linguistic exchanges, limiting their epistemic agency. These harms however are not reducible to linguistic harms, (e.g.,) silencing or discursive injustice. This article applies insight from how second-personal epistemic harm arises in testimonial exchanges to conversational exchanges more generally, demonstrating that epistemic injustices arise beyond testimonial exchanges and contexts of inquiry because deflated knowledge attributions undermine general conversational norms requiring participants assume each other’s conversational competence, generating conversational epistemic injustices. (shrink)

Ratio, Volume 34, Issue 4, Page 334-344, December 2021.

Allan Heaton Anderson is one of the few white South Africans who succeeded in getting out of the entrapment of racial prejudices when it came to the written history of African-initiated churches. He became aware of the fact that an authentic theology can only be examined within context, and thus his theological analysis of African independent churches (AICs) reflects his status in the margins. Anderson not only conducted research among the poor and the downtrodden, where he challenged assumptions made by (...) his white contemporaries, but he also identified with the ‘othering’, those who were powerless and marginalised – contributing immensely to African theology of inclusivity. This article comprised three sections: firstly, it traced Anderson’s journey within and his contribution to the theology of African Pentecostalism; secondly, it explored the notion of typology of AICs using the lens of ‘othering’; and thirdly, it concluded with recent trends in neo-Pentecostalism. Following the philosophical axiom of critical theory, the article was involved in dialogue with Anderson, interrogated European missionary typologies of African-initiated churches and, finally, critiqued the convergence of ‘progressive Pentecostals’ and ‘globalisation’ in shaping a new mission paradigm. Contribution: This article paid closer attention to intersectionality of historiography and hybrid theological subjects such as practical theology and African theology. The contribution of interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary research by white African scholars on African theology was appraised. The article further appreciated the contribution by a white theologian who had mastered African epistemology of being and living by critiquing the theory of paternalistic ‘othering’. (shrink)