Theoretical analysis demonstrates how recognition orients agents to evaluative features, suggesting that repairing misrecognition requires intrapersonal, interpersonal, and institutional...
This paper develops an account of recognition as a normative orientation to others’ evaluative features. Against strong attribution models, I argue that recognition does not generate value or normative reasons but orients agents to evaluative features that already ground responsibilities. I analyze recognitional competence into five interdependent dimensions and show how recognition may succeed or fail at distinct loci. I then examine how institutionalized cultural value patterns mediate these dimensions, producing patterned forms of misrecognition. Drawing on Fraser’s criterion of participatory parity as a heuristic for diagnosing structural distortion, I argue that repair must operate across intrapersonal, interpersonal, and institutional levels. The result is a framework that connects an agent-centered account of recognitional competence with an account of the socio-structural conditions under which that competence succeeds or fails.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kazi A. S. M. Nurul Huda (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: