Ideología, polarización afectiva y análisis del discurso

  1. Villanueva Fernández, Neftalí Villanueva Fernández
  2. Almagro Holgado, Manuel
Revista:
Bajo palabra. Revista de filosofía

ISSN: 1576-3935,  1887-505X

Año de publicación: 2022

Título del ejemplar: Ideología y subjetividad

Número: 31

Páginas: 173-204

Tipo: Artículo

DOI: 10.15366/BP2022.31.008 DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openDialnet editor

Otras publicaciones en: Bajo palabra. Revista de filosofía

Resumen

El proposito de este trabajo es exploraruna tension y un deseo. La tension es la queencontramos entre nuestra capacidad paracambiar de opinion, componente crucial caside cualquier interpretacion del progreso, y latendencia que parecemos exhibir a atrincherarnosen las creencias que estan en el centrode la identidad politica con la que nosidentificamos en un contexto determinado.Nos gustaria ser capaces de detectar y jubilarnuestros prejuicios, de avanzar hacia posicionesmas inclusivas y que nos hicieran mejoresciudadanos. Y, sin embargo, nos vemos arrastrados,en ocasiones contra nuestro mejorjuicio, hacia posiciones que heredamos de laspersonas con las que compartimos las cosasque nos importan. A lo largo de este trabajonos preguntaremos como es posible intervenirsobre esta tension para retener aspectosnecesarios de ambas tendencias. En concreto,pensaremos como es posible intervenir eneste aparente problema cumpliendo un deseo:queremos combatir el mal discurso conmas discurso. Las estrategias de intervenciondestinadas a contrarrestar los efectos negativosde la polarizacion que desarrollaremostendrán como objetivo mejorar la calidad dela deliberacion democratica. El dialogo conaquellas personas con quienes estamos endesacuerdo nos parece un ideal democra?ticoirrenunciable. No hay, en este sentido, progresosin desacuerdo.

Referencias bibliográficas

  • Abeywickrama, R. S. & Laham, S. M., “Meta-cognition predicts attitude depolarization and intentions to engage with the opposition following pro-attitudinal advocacy”, Social Psychology, 51(6), 2020, 408–421. https://doi. org/10.1027/1864-9335/a000424
  • Adler, D. R., “The centrist paradox: Political correlates of the democratic disconnect”, SSRN, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3214467
  • Almagro, M., “La polarización política: polarización expresiva o en actitudes”, Revista de la SLMFCE. Nº Extraordinario Congreso de Posgrado 2019, 2019, 41- 44.
  • Almagro, M. & Fernández-Castro, V., “The Social Cover View: a non-epistemic approach to mindreading”, Philosophia, 48, 2020, 483–505. https://doi. org/10.1007/s11406-019-00096-2
  • Almagro, M., Hannikainen, I. R. & Villanueva, N., “Whose Words Hurt? Contextual Determinants of Offensive Speech”, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1177/01461672211026128
  • Almagro, M., Osorio, M. & Villanueva, N., “Weaponized Testimonial Injustice”, Las Torres de Lucca, 10(29), 2021, 29-42. https://doi.org/10.5209/ltdl.76461
  • Almagro, M. & Villanueva, N., “Polarización y tecnologías de la información: radicales vs. extremistas”, Dilemata, Revista Internacional de Éticas Aplicadas, 34, 2021, 51-69.
  • Almagro, M. & Villanueva, N., “Exactly, what do you mean?”, Daimon, Revista Internacional de Filosofía, 84, 2021, 97-113. https://doi.org/10.6018/daimon.482231
  • Almagro, M. & Villanueva, N., “Qué decir y qué esperar cuando hablamos de la pandemia”, Revista de la Sociedad de Lógica, Metodología y Filosofía de la Ciencia en España, Número especial: Filosofía en tiempos de pandemia, 2021c, 64-71.
  • Almagro, M., Bordonaba, D., Osorio, J. & Villanueva, N., “Crossed disagreements and Polarization”, manuscrito.
  • Almagro, M. & Villanueva, N., “Can we get polarized over what we don’t understand?”, manuscrito.
  • Bail, C. A., Argyle, L. P., Brown, T. W., Bumpus, J. P., Chen, H., Hunzaker, F., Lee, J., Mann, M., Merhout, F., & Volfovsky, A., “Exposure to opposing views on social media can increase political polarization”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 115(37) 2018. https://doi. org/10.1073/pnas.1804840115
  • Barberá, P., Jost, J. T., Nagler, J., Tucker, J. A., Bonneau, R., “Tweeting from left to right: Is online political communication more than an echo chamber?”, Psychological Science, 26(10), 2015, 1531–1542. https://doi. org/10.1177/0956797615594620
  • Bordonaba, D., “Polarización como Impermeabilidad: Cuando las Razones Ajenas no Importan”, Cinta de Moebio, 66, 2019, 295-309.
  • Bordonaba, D., “Los peligros de las cámaras de eco”, Endoxa, 45, 2020, 249– 260.
  • Bordonaba, D. & Villanueva, N., “Affective polarization as impervious reasoning”, en Philosophical Perspectives. The 13th conference of the Italian Society for Analytic Philosophy: Italian Society for Analytic Philosophy, 2018.
  • Bordonaba, D. & Villanueva, N., “Crossed Disagreements: A Quantitative and Qualitative Study on the Minutes of the Sessions of the Spanish Parliament”, Actas del IX Congreso de la Sociedad de Lógica, Metodología y Filosofía de la Ciencia en España, 2018, 101- 108.
  • Bordonaba, D. & Villanueva, N., “Retractación y Contextualismo: Nuevas Condiciones de Adecuación”, en D. Pérez (ed.), Cuestiones de la filosofía del lenguaje, Zaragoza, Prensas de la Universidad de Zaragoza, 2022, 233-259.
  • Bordonaba, D., Fernández-Castro, V. & Torices, J. R., The Political Turn in Analytic Philosophy. Reflections on Social Injustice and Oppression, Berlin, De Gruyter, 2022.
  • Boxell, L., Gentzkow, M., & Shapiro, J. M., “Cross-country trends in affective polarization”, Technical report, National Bureau of Economic Research, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1162/rest_a_01160
  • Bramson, A., Grim, P., Singer, D. J., Berger, W. J., Sack, G., Fisher, S., Flocken, C., & Holman, B., “Understanding polarization: meanings, measures, and model evaluation”, Philosophy of science, 84(1), 2017, 115–159. https://doi. org/10.1086/688938
  • Brown, R., Social Psychology: The Second Edition, New York, The Free Press. 1985.
  • Carothers, T. & O’Donohue, A., Democracies divided: The global challenge of political polarization, Portland (OR), Brookings Institution Press, 2019.
  • Cassam, Q., Vices of the Mind: From the Intellectual to the Political, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2019.
  • Chen, H., Reardon, R., Rea, C., & Moore, D. J., “Forewarning of content and involvement: Consequences for persuasion and resistance to persuasion”, Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 28, 1992, 523–541. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(92)90044-K
  • Davies, A., “Identity display: another motive for metalinguistic disagreement”, Inquiry, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2020.1712229
  • De Cruz, H. & De Smedt, J., “The value of epistemic disagreement in scientific practice. the case of homo floresiensis”, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A, 44(2), 2013, 169–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.shpsa.2013.02.002
  • Dorst, K., “Rational Polarization”, SSRN, 2021. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ ssrn.3918498
  • Fiorina, M. P., Unstable Majorities: Polarization, Party Sorting, and Political Stalemate, Washington DC, Hoover Press, 2017.
  • Gidron, N., Adams, J., & Horne, W., American Affective Polarization in Comparative Perspective, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2020.
  • Hetherington, M. J., “Putting polarization in perspective”, British Journal of Political Science, 39(2), 2009, 413–448. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27742750
  • Hetherington, M. J. & Rudolph, T. J., Why Washington won’t work: Polarization, political trust, and the governing crisis, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2015.
  • Hetherington, M. J. & Weiler, J. D., Authoritarianism and polarization in American politics, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2009. ICIP, “Encuesta sobre polarización y convivencia en Cataluña 2020”, consultado en https://www.icip.cat/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/informes_2020-17_ cas_compressed.pdf (consultado: 04/11/2021)
  • Iyengar, S., Lelkes, Y., Levendusky, M., Malhotra, N., & Westwood, S. J., “The origins and consequences of affective polarization in the United States”, Annual Review of Political Science, 22, 2019, 129–146.
  • Kahan, D. M., “The expressive rationality of inaccurate perceptions”, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x15002332
  • Kahan, D. M., Jenkins-Smith, H., & Braman, D., “Cultural cognition of scientific consensus”, Journal of Risk Research, 14(2), 2011, 147–174. https://doi.org /10.1080/13669877.2010.511246
  • Kelly, T., “Disagreement, dogmatism, and belief polarization”, The Journal of Philosophy, 105 (10), 2008, 611–633. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20620131
  • Klinenberg, E., Palaces for the People. How Social Infrastructure can help fight Inequality, Polarization, and the decline of Civil Rights, New York, Crown, 2018.
  • Kunda, Z., “The Case for Motivated Reasoning”, Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 1990, 480-498. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480
  • Legrain, P., Them and Us: How Immigrants and Locals Can Thrive Together, London, Oneworld Publications, 2020.
  • Levitsky, S. & Ziblatt, D., How democracies die. Portland (OR), Broadway Books, 2018.
  • Levendusky, M. S., “When efforts to depolarize the electorate fail”, Public Opinion Quarterly, 83(3), 2018, 583–592. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfy036
  • Lord, Charles G., Ross, L., Lepper, M. R., “Biased Assimilation and Attitude Polarization: The Effects of Prior Theories on Subsequently Considered Evidence”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(11), 1979, 2098-2109. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.37.11.2098
  • Mason, L., Uncivil agreement: How politics became our identity, Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 2018.
  • Miller, A. G., McHoskey, J. W., Bane, C. M., & Dowd, T. G., “The attitude polarization phenomenon: Role of response measure, attitude extremity, and behavioral consequences of reported attitude change”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 64(4), 1993, 561–574. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022- 3514.64.4.561
  • Munro, G. D. & Ditto, P. H., “Biased assimilation, attitude polarization, and affect in reactions to stereotype-relevant scientific information”, Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23(6), 1997, 636–653. https://doi. org/10.1177/0146167297236007
  • Napier, J.L. y Luguri, J.B., From Silos to Synergies. The Effects of Construal Level on Political Polarization, London, Routledge, 2016.
  • Navajas, J., Heduan, F. A., Garrido, J. M., González, P. A., Garbulsky, G., Ariely, D., & Sigman, M., “Reaching consensus in polarized moral debates”, Current Biology, 29, 2019, 4124–4129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cub.2019.10.018
  • Osorio, J., & Villanueva, N., “Expressivism and Crossed Disagreements”, Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplements, 86, 2019, 111–132. https://doi.org/10.1017/ S1358246119000092
  • Pérez-Navarro, E. & Villanueva, N. “Expresivismo contemporáneo: nuevos retos y nuevas soluciones”, en I. Vicario (ed.), Filosofía del Lenguaje, Madrid, Tecnos, en prensa.
  • Pinedo, M., “Ecological psychology and enactivism: A normative way out from ontological dilemmas”, Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 2020, 1–10. https://doi. org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01637
  • Pinedo, M. & Villanueva, N., “Epistemic de-platforming”, en D. Bordonaba, V. Fernández, & J. R. Torices (Eds.), The Political Turn in Analytic Philosophy. Reflections on Social Injustice and Oppression, Berlin, De Gruyter, 2022.
  • Porter, E., Wood, T. J., & Bahador, B., “Can presidential misinformation on climate change be corrected? evidence from internet and phone experiments” Research and Politics, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1177/2053168019864784
  • Schkade, D., Sunstein, C. S., & Hastie, R., “What Happened on Deliberation Day?”, California Law Review, 95(3), 2007, 915-940. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20439113
  • Singer, D.J., Bramson, A., Grim, P. et al., “Rational social and political polarization”, Philosophical Studies, 176, 2019, 2243–2267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11098-018-1124-5
  • Sunstein, C. R., “The law of group polarization”, The Journal of Political Philosophy, 10(2), 2002, 175–195. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9760.00148
  • Sunstein, C. R., Going to extremes: How like minds unite and divide, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2009.
  • Sunstein, C. R., Republic: Divided Democracy in the Age of Social Media, Princeton, Princeton University Press, 2017.
  • Tajfel, H., Billig, M. G., Bundy, R. P., & Flament, C., “Social Categorization and Intergroup Behaviour”, European Journal of Social Psychology, 1(2), 1971, 149–78.
  • Talisse, R. B., Overdoing democracy: Why we must put politics in its place, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2019.
  • Torices, J. R., “Understanding dogwhistles politics”, Theoria. An International Journal for Theory, History and Foundations of Science, 2021. https://doi. org/10.1387/theo- ria.22510
  • Unkelbach, C., Koch, A., Silva, R. R., & Garcia-Marques, T., “Truth by repetition: Explanations and implications”, Current Directions in Psychological Science, 28(3), 2019, 247–253. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721419827854
  • Vicario, M. D., Bessi, A., Zollo, F., Petroni, F., Scala, A., Caldarelli, G., Stanley, H. E., Quattrociocchi, W., “The spreading of misinformation online”, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113 (3), 2016, 554– 559. https:// doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1517441113
  • Villanueva, N., “Expresivismo y semántica”, en D. Pérez Chico (Ed.), Cuestiones de la filosofía del lenguaje, Prensas Universitarias de Zaragoza, 2018, 437-470.
  • Villanueva, N., “Wittgenstein: descripciones y estados mentales”, en J. J. Acero (Ed.), Guía Comares de Wittgenstein, Comares, 2019, 145–170.
  • Williams, D., “Signalling, commitment, and strategic absurdities”, Mind & Language, 2021, 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1111/mila.12392
  • Wittgenstein, L., Philosophical Investigations. [IF]. Edición de Rhees, R. y Anscombe, G. E. M.. Traducido al inglés por Anscombe, G. E. M. Edición revisada. Oxford, Blackwell, 1956/1998.
Fuente de los datos: Dialnet