Acting Together in Asymmetrical Ways - Towards a New Sociological Understanding of Asymmetrical Coaction
(2019) Toward an Asymmetrical Ethics- Abstract
- Asymmetry. What is in the word? One kind of asymmetry is asymmetrical coaction, that is, when actors relate in different ways to one another and/or partake differently in an action done together. Coaction requires that the actors acting together, during the process, reach an enlarged mentality (Arendt, Lectures on Kant’s Political Philosophy), either through putting themselves in the position of others, imagining what the situation might look like through their eyes (enlarged mentality as a result of imagination), or through taking the actual perspectives of others (enlarged mentality as a result of dialogue) (cf. Mead, Mind, Self & Society, on role taking). One aspect of asymmetrical coaction can be conceptualized as asymmetrical... (More)
- Asymmetry. What is in the word? One kind of asymmetry is asymmetrical coaction, that is, when actors relate in different ways to one another and/or partake differently in an action done together. Coaction requires that the actors acting together, during the process, reach an enlarged mentality (Arendt, Lectures on Kant’s Political Philosophy), either through putting themselves in the position of others, imagining what the situation might look like through their eyes (enlarged mentality as a result of imagination), or through taking the actual perspectives of others (enlarged mentality as a result of dialogue) (cf. Mead, Mind, Self & Society, on role taking). One aspect of asymmetrical coaction can be conceptualized as asymmetrical perspective taking. In the simple case of two actors, one of them might reach an enlarged mentality through imagination and the other one through listening to the first one putting her or his perspective into words. Taking each other into account through position taking or/and perspective taking is not enough though; in order to act together the actors (or at least some of the actors) have to combine imagined or/and actual perspectives in some way (cf. Arendt, ibid.). This combination of perspectives can be done in different ways, and another aspect of asymmetrical coaction can be conceptualized as asymmetrical perspective combination. One way of combining perspectives is synthetization. Compatible perspectives can be synthetized rather easily, but when the perspectives are incompatible with one another, synthetization cannot be done unless at least one of the perspectives is changed. In other words, there is need for an adjustment for synthetization to take place, and the actors taking part in this process of adjustment might be subject to different conditions of thinking and speaking (cf. Habermas on the ideal speech situation). Consequently, the process of adjustment can be asymmetrical for different reasons. But synthetization does not even have to take place for coaction to be possible; instead, the perspectives can be arranged in an order where one of the perspectives is given priority. When perspectives are arranged in this way there is an asymmetrical perspective combination. In my paper I will elaborate on this understanding of asymmetrical coaction. Two independent, rational subjects of the same kind will not be seen as a universal ideal, rather as a special case. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
https://lup.lub.lu.se/record/dda1356a-3afc-4311-98c6-e91a40da87ac
- author
- Engstam, Anna LU
- organization
- publishing date
- 2019-11
- type
- Contribution to conference
- publication status
- published
- subject
- conference name
- Toward an Asymmetrical Ethics
- conference location
- Stockholm, Sweden
- conference dates
- 2019-11-13 - 2019-11-15
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- dda1356a-3afc-4311-98c6-e91a40da87ac
- date added to LUP
- 2023-12-19 15:26:41
- date last changed
- 2023-12-20 08:47:04
@misc{dda1356a-3afc-4311-98c6-e91a40da87ac,
abstract = {{Asymmetry. What is in the word? One kind of asymmetry is asymmetrical coaction, that is, when actors relate in different ways to one another and/or partake differently in an action done together. Coaction requires that the actors acting together, during the process, reach an enlarged mentality (Arendt, Lectures on Kant’s Political Philosophy), either through putting themselves in the position of others, imagining what the situation might look like through their eyes (enlarged mentality as a result of imagination), or through taking the actual perspectives of others (enlarged mentality as a result of dialogue) (cf. Mead, Mind, Self & Society, on role taking). One aspect of asymmetrical coaction can be conceptualized as asymmetrical perspective taking. In the simple case of two actors, one of them might reach an enlarged mentality through imagination and the other one through listening to the first one putting her or his perspective into words. Taking each other into account through position taking or/and perspective taking is not enough though; in order to act together the actors (or at least some of the actors) have to combine imagined or/and actual perspectives in some way (cf. Arendt, ibid.). This combination of perspectives can be done in different ways, and another aspect of asymmetrical coaction can be conceptualized as asymmetrical perspective combination. One way of combining perspectives is synthetization. Compatible perspectives can be synthetized rather easily, but when the perspectives are incompatible with one another, synthetization cannot be done unless at least one of the perspectives is changed. In other words, there is need for an adjustment for synthetization to take place, and the actors taking part in this process of adjustment might be subject to different conditions of thinking and speaking (cf. Habermas on the ideal speech situation). Consequently, the process of adjustment can be asymmetrical for different reasons. But synthetization does not even have to take place for coaction to be possible; instead, the perspectives can be arranged in an order where one of the perspectives is given priority. When perspectives are arranged in this way there is an asymmetrical perspective combination. In my paper I will elaborate on this understanding of asymmetrical coaction. Two independent, rational subjects of the same kind will not be seen as a universal ideal, rather as a special case.}},
author = {{Engstam, Anna}},
language = {{eng}},
title = {{Acting Together in Asymmetrical Ways - Towards a New Sociological Understanding of Asymmetrical Coaction}},
year = {{2019}},
}