Achievements of the Rational : A comparative argumentation analysis of witch hunts and conspiracy theories

Sammanfattning: According to philosopher Richard Rorty, rational debate and reasoning has limited impact on normative development of society. This seems to be at odds with modern design of democratic institutions, which are built to facilitate rational debate. Through a comparative study of two cases, the present paper examines Rorty’s theory. In cases where one would expect no rational debate, it can sometimes still be observed by applying a general definition of rationality and accepting the premises of the context in which the debate is situated. Two cases are studied, one within a religious historical context – the 17th century Basque witch hunts, the other within a secular, contemporary context – the QAnon far right conspiracy theory. Analysis of these debates show that one case is predominantly rational, whereas the other is not. Both cases generated significant normative development. It is possible to conclude that Rorty’s theory should be nuanced. Rational debate seems to play a part in normative development, even though it is not the only factor. Results of debates depend on the arguments, society’s susceptibility, who is involved, the platform used for the debate, the capabilities actors among other factors.