Edited by Yvonne Huetter-Almerigi (University of Bologna) & Mauro Santelli (University of Buenos Aires)

Robert Brandom’s version of inferentialism is one of the most sophisticated, far-reaching, and prolific systems in analytic philosophy over the past half-century. His work is widely discussed both within and outside philosophy and has influenced disciplines such as political theory and the social sciences. Philosophers like Lynne Tirrell and Tracy Llanera have applied his inferentialism to questions of deep social and political relevance.

However, Brandom himself does not directly address the political and social implications of his approach. It has been noted that his account says little about power relations within the “game of giving and asking for reasons” (Pippin, Sachs, Voparil). This stands in stark contrast to some of his more direct influences in the pragmatist tradition like Dewey and Rorty.

This special issue is devoted to exploring both the potential applications of Brandom’s philosophy in political theory and the perceived lack of attention to politics and contestations within his system. What does Brandom have to say about these topics? Is there indeed a lack, and if so, can it be addressed, complemented, or reconstructed differently? Furthermore, how can his inferentialism be made fertile for these discussions? What does it reveal that might otherwise remain invisible? Does it make explicit certain aspects of power relations that would otherwise remain implicit?

We are looking for contributions that address these and related topics. Possible questions and problem sets include, but are not limited to:

• Intersections of Brandom with Marxist, feminist, and continental philosophy (e.g., Butler, Derrida, Foucault, Laclau, Mouffe, Spivak, …): What does Brandom’s inferentialism say, or what can be said with it, about power dynamics and discursive formations? Being an intentional agent involves being part of a discursive community, but what does this entail concerning power mechanisms?

• Brandom and the Frankfurt School (Habermas, Honneth, Jaeggi, Rebentisch, …): Brandom’s philosophy is a unique version of the Kant-Hegel matrix of recognition and rational deliberation. Is there a blind spot regarding power relations? Whose voices are excluded or unrecognized? Or is Brandom’s philosophy rather a perfect tool to ensure that voices do not get lost?

• Brandom’s logics and discursive norms with an eye on (irresolvable) contestation: Exploring how Brandom’s framework addresses or fails to address the issue of ongoing contestation within discourses.

• Inferentialist conceptual engineering and the implementation challenge: Can Brandom’s philosophy offer a new perspective on implementation problems? How do we account for and mediate potential conceptual domination?

• Brandom’s philosophical anthropology and theory of rationality: Brandom’s magnum opus, Making It Explicit, tries to address what kind of beings we are drawing on the idea that we are the kinds of beings that can say “we” (and “them”?). How does conflict impact the game of giving and asking for reasons? What can be said about political institutions from this framework?

Confirmed invited contributors:

• Susan Dieleman

• Catarina Dutilh Novaes

• Federico Penelas

• Lynne Tirrell

There are 4-5 additional slots available for the open section. All contributions must be prepared for blind review and submitted by May 30, 2025, to both editors:

• Yvonne Huetter-Almerigi: y.huetter[at]unibo.it

• Mauro Santelli: mesantelli[at]uba.ar

Please indicate “EJPAP Brandom” in the object-line.