I am a graduate student in philosophy at the University of Texas at Austin. I specialize in social and political issues in the philosophy of language. My research on dog whistles, coded speech, propaganda, and slurs focuses on how communicated content is shaped by temporally extended and sociopolitically structured linguistic practices.
More recently, I'm also a (very) amateur potter—perhaps one of the few human practices older than philosophy.
You can find my CV here.
No one denies that language is a social practice, but most analytic philosophy of language abstracts away from the sociopolitical aspects of language, or goes even further to treat language primarily as an abstract, formal entity. What happens if we prioritize the social, political, practical elements of linguistic communication?
I argue that this shift in focus yields productive challenges for the notion of what is said and for our assumptions about what it's possible for a speaker to say. To fully understand what and how speakers can communicate, we'll need to theorize about linguistic communities and their practices, rather than solely about individual speakers and their communicative intentions.
Dog whistles, propaganda, and reclaimed slurs are useful test cases for this approach, because they don't fit the standard mold of true, relevant assertions made by one cooperative, rational speaker to one cooperative, rational hearer. My work thus seeks not only to understand these phenomena in their own right, but also to identify what these phenomena can teach us about how we should study communication and speech more broadly.
Work in Progress
Titles redacted. Drafts are available on request.
A paper on reclaiming slurs
A paper on competing accounts of practices
A paper on Wittgenstein's rule-following paradox
The Stand in the Schoolhouse Door — June 11, 1963
While physically preventing the University of Alabama's first-ever Black students from entering a university building, Alabama Governor George Wallace declaims on national TV against violations of "states' rights."
Photo by Warren K. Leffler, U.S. News & World Report Magazine.
Queer Nation activists march in New York City — 1990
At a time when "queer" is used almost exclusively as a homophobic slur, members of Queer Nation set out to reclaim the term, subversively using "queer" at Gay Pride events and during protests and demonstrations.
Photo by Ellen Neipris.
"Dog Whistles, Covertly Coded Speech, and the Practices that Enable Them," Synthese 200 (2022).
Penultimate draft available here.
Abstract: Dog whistling—speech that seems ordinary but sends a hidden, often derogatory message to a subset of the audience—is troubling not just for our political ideals, but also for our theories of communication. On the one hand, it seems possible to dog whistle unintentionally, merely by uttering certain expressions. On the other hand, the intention is typically assumed or even inferred from the act, and perhaps for good reason, for dog whistles seem misleading by design, not just by chance. In this paper, I argue that, to understand when and why it’s possible to dog-whistle unintentionally (and indeed, intentionally), we’ll need to recognize the structure of our linguistic practices. For dog whistles and for covertly coded speech more generally, this structure is a pair of practices, one shared by all competent speakers and the other known only to some, but deployable in the same contexts. In trying to identify these enabling conditions, we’ll discover what existing theories of communicated content overlook by focusing on particular utterances in isolation, or on individual speakers’ mental states. The remedy, I argue, lies in attending to the ways in which what is said is shaped by the temporally extended, socio-politically structured linguistic practices that utterances instantiate.
“Propaganda” (with Jason Stanley) in The Routledge Handbook of Social and Political Philosophy of Language, ed. Justin Khoo and Rachel Sterken (Routledge, 2021), 125–46.
Penultimate draft available here.