Doctor of Philosophy, The Ohio State University, 2025, Philosophy

This dissertation examines whether philosophical angst about nihilism—specifically nihilism about authoritative normativity—is a fitting emotional response. Authoritative nihilism holds that while generic normative standards exist, no normative standards have the special “oomphy” authority often attributed to morality, rationality, or other binding normative domains. Rather than attempting to refute nihilism, I investigate whether we should worry about it even if it were true. I begin by confronting the self-defeat argument, which suggests that if nihilism is true, then nihilism itself cannot be bad. This creates a puzzle: how can we even coherently ask whether nihilism's truth would be bad? I resolve this by reframing the question in terms of fittingness norms—standards that regulate emotions without requiring authoritative normativity. I argue that angst is fitting only when its object would be bad in some way we care about and when we either believe this object obtains or rationally suspend judgment about whether it does. In subsequent chapters, I demonstrate that nihilism would not undermine core human concerns. Chapter Two shows how our deliberative practices can be replaced with “schmeliberation”—a process that provides the same practical benefits as deliberation without assuming authoritative normativity. Chapter Three distinguishes between “nihilism-susceptible” and “nihilism-resistant” varieties of meaning in life, arguing that nihilism-resistant varieties (particularly terrestrial meaning) provide everything we instrumentally value about meaning. Throughout, I employ a general strategy of identifying replacements for practices that seem to require authoritative normativity, showing that these alternatives can deliver the same benefits without the problematic metaphysical commitments. I conclude that angst about nihilism is unfitting: if nihilism is true, it is not bad in any sense that warrants angst; if nihilism is false, angst about it is mis (open full item for complete abstract)

Committee: Tristram McPherson (Advisor); Eden Lin (Committee Member); Justin D'Arms (Committee Member) Subjects: Philosophy

Doctor of Philosophy, The Ohio State University, 2024, Linguistics

Sociolinguistic variationism has contributed much to our understanding of identity and identity construction, including with respect to gender, showing that identity is not simply one's self-identification but constructed through sociolinguistic elements including indexicality and style. However, much research on sociolinguistic style and indexicality within variationism has studied fairly homogenous populations of language users, and even variationist language and gender research has focused primarily on speakers with only one degree of separation from the unmarked white, straight, middle class, cisgender norm (i.e., gay, cisgender white men), leaving open questions about the application of the social meaning of variables to those whose identities place them more than one degree outside of this norm. Though it is known that social meaning is shaped in the interface between production and perception within variationist sociolinguistics, little work has integrated the two, especially for marginalized speakers. Since racialized and gender non-conforming speakers must rely in large part on normative social meanings of sociolinguistic variables in order to construct their non-normative identities, ideology, power, and identity at the production-perception interface impact how these individuals navigate the sociolinguistic landscape. This dissertation thus explores how ideology and power manifest in the sociolinguistic identity construction of Black and white nonbinary speakers through both qualitative and quantitative analyses of both sociolinguistic production and perception, questioning the semiotic tools that these individuals use for resistance to hegemonic gender norms, with a focus on fronted /s/, a variable robustly tied to gender in previous work. The first study uses qualitative, grounded theory analyses of interviews with twenty Black and white nonbinary speakers to develop a picture of the styles that these individuals orient to, situating them within grea (open full item for complete abstract)

Committee: Kathryn Campbell-Kibler (Advisor); J Calder (Committee Member); Donald Winford (Committee Member); Anna Babel (Committee Member) Subjects: Gender; Gender Studies; Linguistics; Sociolinguistics

Doctor of Philosophy, The Ohio State University, 2020, English

My dissertation, Performing Brawn and Sass: Strength and Disability in Black Women's Writing, examines contemporary African American narratives to gauge how writers re-imagine, complicate, or even reject the trope of the Strong Black Woman. I define the “Strong Black Woman” as a standard that black women are assumed to inherently demonstrate. As opposed to the demureness of conventional femininity, the Strong Black Woman is portrayed as bold and outspoken. In addition to being physically strong and able to labor, she possesses the emotional and mental resolve that allows her to hold her family and her community together during hardship. The cultural endurance of the figure is a major problem I cite in my dissertation. Because the Strong Black Woman is such a cultural mainstay in African American literature and mainstream media, she has become a source of racial pride exclusively synonymous with black womanhood. However, I identify the Strong Black Woman as an ableist ideal that oversimplifies black female narrative voice and erases bodily variety. I argue that by rejecting the Strong Black Woman's ableism and investment in self-sacrifice while adapting her dedication to survival and independence, black women writers present black female characters less familiar than the Strong Black Woman, but more complex and human. I take a two-pronged approach to my methodology, placing scholarship from black feminist theory and disability studies in conversation with one another. Black feminist theory's investigation of race and gender, and the dynamics between black women and systems of power greatly informs my character analysis. Furthermore, disability studies critics have shown how normativity isn't an objective, universal measure, but is instead an extension of hegemony, marking and policing all bodies that exist outside of the white ideal. My dissertation uses this conceptual framework to explore how the representation of black women's bodyminds and behavior as inherently (open full item for complete abstract)

Committee: Andrea Williams (Committee Chair); Robyn Warhol (Advisor); Koritha Mitchell (Advisor); Treva Lindsey (Advisor) Subjects: African Americans; Gender Studies; Literature

Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.), Bowling Green State University, 2020, Philosophy, Applied

Global normative error theorists argue that there are no authoritative normative reasons of any kind. Thus, according to the error theory, the normative demands of law, prudence, morality, etc. are of no greater normative significance than the most absurd standards we can conceive of. Because the error theory is a radically revisionary view, theorists who accept it only do so because they maintain the view is supported by the best available arguments. In this dissertation, I argue that error theory entails that it is impossible that there are successful arguments for anything, thus defenses of error theory are in tension with the view, itself. My argument begins with the observation that it is natural to think a successful argument is one that gives us an authoritative normative reason to believe its conclusion. Error theory entails that there are no authoritative reasons to believe anything. What are arguments for error theory even supposed to accomplish? Error theorists may respond that their arguments are solely intended to get at the truth. I argue that this reply fails. One problem is that it cannot make sense of why in practice even error theorists still want evidence for the premises of sound arguments. Error theorists may try to capture the importance of evidence by appeal to our social norms or goals. I argue that this answer is indistinguishable from the view that our social practices or goals generate authoritative normative requirements. Thus, attempts to defend the coherence of arguing for error theory are either unacceptably revisionary or they are inconsistent with error theory. While this result is a problem for error theory, it seems consistent with highly relativistic accounts of normative authority. In the future, I plan to explore whether my core arguments can be extended to defend authoritative, universal scope normative requirements (e.g. of prudence and morality).

Committee: Michael Weber Dr (Advisor); Verner Bingman Dr (Other); Christian Coons Dr (Committee Member); Molly Gardner Dr (Committee Member); Sara Worley (Committee Member) Subjects: Philosophy

Master of Fine Arts, Miami University, 2020, Art

This study was designed to discover what strategies Christian couples with progressive values who are engaged to be married can use to plan a wedding that honors their beliefs and prepares them to be partners in a marriage that values egalitarian principles. Attitude changes in the last decade support progressive values and social reform in regards to wedding celebrations, however Christian couples who have progressive values continue to launch their marriage with a traditional wedding full of sexist traditions and gender normative implications. 22 survey participants, three of which were interviewed, were studied to learn their views on Feminism and wedding traditions. A website intervention was designed based on these responses that used marriage coaching during the wedding planning process by simulating wedding and marriage tasks. Through these solutions, the intervention was designed to help these couples establish a more egalitarian relationship, navigate relationship conflict, recognize sexist traditions while honoring and respecting their religious affiliation, and establish autonomy from family. The outcome of this design was tested on new participants, and this study reports results which revealed that participants required more incentive to interact with a marriage coaching service, and they valued counselors who had professional credentials or certifications.

Committee: Dennis Cheatham (Advisor); Zack Tucker (Committee Member); Allison Farrell (Committee Member) Subjects: Behavioral Psychology; Biblical Studies; Counseling Psychology; Design; Gender Studies; Individual and Family Studies; Psychotherapy; Religion; Social Psychology; Sociology

Master of Arts (MA), Bowling Green State University, 2016, English

In this project, I undertake a queer Marxist reading of the television series Orphan Black. Specifically, I investigate the portrayal of women and queer characters in order to discover the conflicting dominant and oppositional ideologies circulating in the series. Doing so allows me to reveal cultural anxieties that haunt the series even as it challenges normative power relations. I argue that while Orphan Black's narrative subverts traditional gender roles, critiques heteronormativity, and offers sexually fluid characters, the series still reifies the traditionally ideal Western female body: thin, attractive, legibly gendered, and fertile. I draw on Antonio Gramsci's theory of ideology and hegemony, Heidi Hartman's analysis of Marxism and feminism, and Judith Butler's theory of gender performativity to unpack the series' non-normative depiction of gender and its simultaneous reliance on a stable gender binary. I frame my argument with Todd Gitlin's understanding of hegemony's ability to domesticate radical ideas in television. I argue that Orphan Black imagines spaces and scenarios that offer the potential to liberate women from heteronormative expectations and limit patriarchy's harm. The series privileges a queer female collective and envisions a world where women have freedom from normative conceptions of gender and sexuality. Nevertheless, as I will explain throughout this project, these narrative freedoms come at a cost, as the series domesticates the radical ideas it presents. The series' amalgamation of cultural influences becomes apparent through its inconsistent messages about women's bodies and autonomy. In the series' critique of patriarchal institutions and ideas, it fixates on a specific female body and biological kinship.

Committee: Bill Albertini (Advisor); Kimberly Coates (Committee Member) Subjects: Canadian Studies; Film Studies; Gender; Gender Studies; Literature; Mass Media; Philosophy; Womens Studies

Doctor of Philosophy, Miami University, 2014, English

This dissertation focuses on representations of homosexuality in the works of writers Oscar Wilde, Ernest Hemingway, E.M. Forster, and Stephen Spender. I focus on British and American authors because of a shared history and common culture - they often knew each other, each other's works, and used the similar literary trope of homosexuality in their writings. I argue that male authors from this period use representations of homosexuality to deconstruct normative discourses of the state and masculinity, showing how these discourses limit individuality and the important role of sexuality in maintaining the normativity of the state. In the introduction, I situate my analysis between the trials of Oscar Wilde and the Stonewall Riots, drawing on theorists such as Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick, Michel Foucault, and Louis Althusser to show how my representative authors challenge dominant discourses of gender, masculinity, and the state. The first chapter begins by historicizing representations of homosexuality within legal, scientific, and moral discourses as a way to think about the relationship between literary presentations and arguments occurring at the time. Chapters two through five examine the works of Oscar Wilde, Ernest Hemingway, E.M. Forster, and Stephen Spender. In terms of representations of homosexuality, each chapter moves from covert and disguised to increasingly more open and public representations. They also feature an intensification of more direct reverse-discourses, or counter-discourses, that challenge and subvert dominant discourses. Ultimately, I contend that the authors find a way to create a common idiom in order to depict a sense of crisis during this time period, challenge dominant discourses, and offer a new way to view identity. In the conclusion, I contrast Wilde's trials with the trial resulting from the assassination of Harvey Milk. These two trials demonstrate the drastically different discourses concerning homosexuality and highlight an (open full item for complete abstract)

Committee: Madelyn Detloff (Committee Chair); Erin Edwards (Committee Member); Diana Royer (Committee Member); Mary Frederickson (Committee Member) Subjects: American History; American Literature; American Studies; British and Irish Literature; European History; Gender Studies; History; Literature

Master of Arts (MA), Ohio University, 2014, Philosophy (Arts and Sciences)

This paper will argue that claims of need cannot be fully understood, and their normative import cannot be adequately assessed, without first understanding the purpose which gives rise to the need and then making a normative judgment of some kind about that purpose. This view is contrary to the position argued by David Wiggins, which appears to be the standard view in contemporary philosophy of need, that there is a class of so-called “absolute” needs which can be understood and addressed even in the absence of such a context. In this paper I give some prima facie reasons for thinking that need claims always take place within a context of normatively weighted purposes, discuss Wiggins' opposing view, and expose certain problematic elements of that view. I then consider and reject several possible ways of trying to salvage the absolute need concept before ultimately rejecting the concept altogether.

Committee: Mark LeBar PhD (Advisor); Alyssa Bernstein PhD (Committee Member); Arthur Zucker PhD (Committee Member) Subjects: Ethics; Philosophy

Doctor of Philosophy, The Ohio State University, 2014, Germanic Languages and Literatures

Section One of the dissertation explicates the post-secular philosophical discourse between Jurgen Habermas and Charles Taylor, while Section Two analyzes contemporary German and American novels in which religious fundamentalism figures prominently. The genesis of Habermas' reflections on religion is shown within his overall philosophy, and is then compared and contrasted with Taylor's viewpoints. Their respective concepts of “translation” and “articulation” are extrapolated in an effort to highlight deficiencies in widely-held notions of the secular. The literary analysis of Fatah, Peters and Updike examines the way in which the authors aesthetically depict the dynamics of a religious-secular divide, thereby enhancing critical reflection on understandings of religion, secularism and their presumed or apparent dichotomy. Both the philosophical and literary discourses are guided by the fundamental question of how normativity arises-both within the individual subject and in social collectives.

Committee: Bernd Fischer (Advisor); May Mergenthaler (Committee Member); Robert Holub (Committee Member) Subjects: American Literature; Germanic Literature; Literature; Philosophy

Master of Arts, The Ohio State University, 2011, Communication

Computer-mediated communication (CMC) research has long been interested in how interpersonal impressions form online. This research argues that, given the advance of technology and the diversity in online environments, researchers must now consider the context in which social information appears in order to more fully understand the effects of social information on impression formation. This study found, in hypotheses based on correspondent inference theory (Jones & Davis, 1965) and the hyperpersonal model (Walther, 1996), that the context of a website impacts credibility impressions. An original 2 (valence of photograph: casual vs professional) x 2 (normative context: WebMD vs Facebook) experiment examining the impact of moving identical cues across contexts found normative expectations impact impression formation. In particular, this experiment assessed how observers judge a doctor's credibility and task-attractiveness based on whether they saw a normative or non-normative picture for the context of the website in which they are presented. Findings indicate support for a non-normativity effect: cues that defied normative expectations were more influential. Based on these findings, it is concluded that a non-normativity effect, based on expectations of the type of information for a specific context, drives the other effects.

Committee: Brandon Van Der Heide PhD (Advisor); Kelly Garrett PhD (Committee Member); Jesse Fox PhD (Committee Member) Subjects: Communication

Bachelor of Arts, Miami University, 2005, College of Arts and Sciences - Philosophy

This thesis examines the nature of ordinary claims and the nature of normativity to better understand how a law acts as a norm for citizens. In particular, Philip Soper's discussion of the ‘Law's Claim to Justice' as the minimal normative claim of the law is investigated. The discussion follows Robert Brandom's philosophy of language and Christine Korsgaard's moral philosophy in analyzing normativity and claims-making. Ultimately, the sophistication of Soper's treatment is revealed, as his perspectives on normativity and claims bear certain affinities to those expounded by Brandom and Korsgaard. Furthermore, Korsgaard's discussion of morality as it relates to normativity leads the discussion to a similar inquiry into the relationship between the law's morality and normativity. The conclusion briefly draws out the implications of these discussions for egoism and Kant's claim to taste.

Committee: S. S. Rama Rao Pappu (Advisor) Subjects: Law; Philosophy