{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.04242424242424243, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.12037037037037, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The forstian bargain: overrationalizing the power of reasons

ABSTRACT Focusing on differences in Rainer Forst's and my otherwise similar discourse theoretical approaches to power and reason, I argue that Forst's equating all power with “noumenal” (i.e. reasons-mediated) power - the “Forstian bargain” - is flawed and should be resisted. For Forst, reasons are justifiers. This ignores reasons’ multiple rational forces. I propose to respecify “fully noumenal” power as a particular form of power, “discourse-power“, the power of reasoners to uphold or to modify via acts of discursive argumentation their convictions about the genuine value of their reasons.