I’m interested in the connection between: how to govern, with: understanding our discourse. As if finding out what mattered, how it matters, how it is lost or abandoned, allows even the possibility to do what is right. An epistemology not of knowledge or morality to lead the republic, but of method, understanding the conditions of our consent and agreement.

@creativesoul: I’m thinking of the structure of current political/social discourse in the framework of analytical philosophy, so, unlike a continental position, I wouldn’t say the content of the event or topic would matter specifically—maybe, where people appear to disagree but also seem to be talking past each other? the sense of impossibility of agreement? can philosophy account for the disappointments of our democracy?