On a Columnar Self: Two Senses of Expressing Partisanship

Almagro, Manuel

doi:10.1007/s11158-023-09641-z

Cited by 2 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In other words, polarized citizens tend to endorse a certain narrative in the abstract, which means that their judgments in concrete situations may remain the same, and their concrete judgments are usually incompatible with the narrative they have endorsed in the abstract. That's why it is relatively common to find little stability in people's political beliefs in affectively polarized contexts -to the extent that we wonder whether polarized people really believe their political statements (see Hannon, 2021, Almagro, 2023-, and that is why in these situations, our political statements primarily serve an identity signaling function (see, for instance, Williams, 2021). 10 For these reasons, I prefer to understand deep disagreements and deep conflicts as separate phenomena.…”

Section: Deep Conflicts and Affective Polarizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deep conflicts and deep disagreements

Almagro

2024

THEORIA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper tackles the following puzzle. On the one hand, a growing body of literature suggests that most of our current political disagreements are pernicious and difficult to resolve because they are instances of deep disagreement. On the other hand, there does not seem to be anything inherent to a deep disagreement that necessarily makes it pernicious nor irresolvable. To address this issue, I distinguish two senses in which a disagreement can be deemed “deep”, and show that they are conflated in the literature. In order to separate them, I refer to these two senses as deep disagreement and deep conflict. Contrary to recent literature, I argue that most of our current pernicious political disagreements are so not because they are instances of deep disagreement, but of deep conflict. This way, the problem disappears.

show abstract

Section: Deep Conflicts and Affective Polarizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Deep conflicts and deep disagreements

Almagro

2024

THEORIA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…See,Almagro (2023) for a developed discussion of the rationality of affective and ideological polarization in the political realm.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Deep Agreements

Baumtrog

2024

Episteme

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent research has highlighted the character and importance of the study of agreement. This paper, paralleling work on the more familiar concept of deep disagreement, will provide a first articulation of the character and implications of deep agreements, that is, agreements so deep that disagreement cannot overcome them. To do so, I start by outlining the main features of deep disagreement. I then provide a brief characterization of agreement in general to ground the discussion of the unique characteristics of deep agreements and compare them to deep disagreements. After distinguishing the concept from other more familiar ones, I then point to a few of the major social and theoretical issues the existence of deep agreements poses before concluding with some remarks pointing to valuable areas for future research.

show abstract

On a Columnar Self: Two Senses of Expressing Partisanship

Cited by 2 publications

References 39 publications

Deep conflicts and deep disagreements

Deep conflicts and deep disagreements

Deep Agreements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About