Motivated Criticism in Indigenous Consultations: Why Indigenous Arguments Do Not Convince the Crown

Abstract

The paper reconstructs the dominant discourse of motivated criticism in a distorted reasoning context of Indigenous consultations with the help of the brand new category of Argument Continuity. Argument Continuity traces the effects of institutional power in reasoning exchanges by connecting arguments, counterarguments, and reasoning practices by the more powerful arguers to the resources (evidence sources) and incentives (costs) given by the authority rules of reasoning exchanges. It reveals how rules reinforce biases in consultations.