[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-599771-105":59,"doc-detail-599771-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","critical-inquiry-as-virtuous-truth-telling-implications-of-phronesis-and-parrhesia","Critical Inquiry as Virtuous Truth-Telling - Implications of Phronesis and Parrhesia","","This article examines critical inquiry and truth-telling through two complementary frameworks: Aristotelian phronesis, practical wisdom oriented toward ethical deliberation amid the contingency of practice, and Foucauldian parrhesia, truth-telling that demands risk and engages the complexity of human discourse. Together, phronesis and parrhesia reorient inquiry toward intentional truth-telling practices that resist simplistic accounts of criticality and purely technical research understandings. Critical inquiry should spring from both perspectives, aiming at virtuous truth-telling over technical veracity to support ethical discourse and social praxis.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/critical-inquiry-as-virtuous-truth-telling-implications-of-phronesis-and-parrhesia/599771/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/critical-inquiry-as-virtuous-truth-telling-implications-of-phronesis-and-parrhesia/599771.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"PakDamar76","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-28","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":29},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"How does the article define critical inquiry and truth-telling?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"It treats critical inquiry as ethically engaged truth-telling rather than technique-driven method. Truth-telling must account for ethical deliberation and the risks involved in speaking truth within complex discourse.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"What role do phronesis and parrhesia play together?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"Phronesis frames truth as practical wisdom oriented toward ethical deliberation, while parrhesia emphasizes risk-bearing, engaged truth-telling grounded in the complexities of human discourse. Combined, they guide inquiry toward intentional, virtuous truth-telling practices.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"Why does the article criticize some “critical” educational scholarship?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"It argues that much work labeled “critical” may be critical only in name, using methods that cannot intervene in the epistemological and ontological formations of normative educational practices. It also notes hesitation toward productive truth-telling in the context of debates about universal emancipatory politics.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},599771,1792167055,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":29,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":56,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144},962090893057,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_155a257f0dc6eb9ab79c44ca47cae57d","| \u003Cbr>| Critical Inquiry as Virtuous Truth-Telling: Implications of Phronesis and Parrhesia |\n| --- | --- |\n\nAustin Pickup, Aurora University  \nAbstract  \nThis article examines critical inquiry and truth-telling from the perspective of two complementary theoretical frameworks. First, Aristotelian phronesis, or practical wisdom, offers a framework for truth that is oriented toward ethical deliberation while recognizing the contingency of practical application. Second, Foucauldian parrhesia calls for an engaged sense of truth-telling that requires risk from the inquirer while grounding truth in the complexity of human discourse. Taken together, phronesis and parrhesia orient inquirers toward intentional truth-telling practices that resist simplistic renderings of criticality and overly technical understandings of research. This article argues that truly critical inquiry must spring from the perspectives of phronesis and parrhesia, providing research projects that aim at virtuous truth-telling over technical veracity with the hope of contributing to ethical discourse and social praxis.  \nKeywords: phronesis, praxis, parrhesia, critical inquiry, truth-telling  \nIntroduction  \nThe theme of this special issue considers the nature of critical inquiry, specifically methodological work that remains committed to explicit goals of social justice and the good. One of the central concerns of this issue is that critical studies have lost much of their meaning due to a proliferation of the term critical in educational scholarship. As noted in the introduction to this issue, much contemporary work in education research that claims to be critical may be so in name only, offering but methodological techniques to engage in critical work; techniques that are incapable of intervening in both the epistemological and ontological formations of normative practices in education. Additionally, the postmodern moment, with its challenge to universalizing theories of emancipatory politics common within critical studies, leaves us reticent to speak truth productively in the aim of social justice. As Kuntz has recently written, we perhaps exist in a state of scholarly paralysis relative to truth-telling where “scholars and theoreticians remain strikingly silent when it comes to their own beliefs or assertions oftruth,” rendering the methodologist “as nearly apolitical.”1  \n1. Aaron M. Kuntz, The Responsible Methodologist: Inquiry, Truth-Telling, and Social Justice (Walnut Creek, CA: Left Coast Press, 2015), 22.  \nIf true, it seems that a situation exists where methodologists have only the ability to speak truth through method and technique, not within the material realities of social and political contexts. Critical inquiry now exhibits a disquieting inability to intervene and disrupt the status quo on a practical and theoretical level. At the heart of this scholarly impotence are the role of truth and the responsibility of the methodologist as a “truth-teller.” Without the ability to perform truthtelling, recognizing this as an ethically engaged act, the methodologist loses the potential for critical work to disrupt the normative flow of contemporary knowing and being. What is left is areversion to the certainty of method or the illusion that analytical language metaphors (e.g. coding techniques) may offer the requisite cultural representation for resisting hegemonic educational practices and discourse. However, for Barad, this linguistic, semiotic, and interpretive turn toward cultural representation through language has been given too much power.2 The overemphasis on linguistic techniques neglects the materiality ofour lived contexts and precludes new onto-epistemological framings ofthe world. Thus, methodology loses its practical and theoretical import, as it resists speaking truths to who we are and might be ontologically and, relatedly, to what we know and what is possible to know epistemologically.  \nThis does not accord with the central tenets of cri","cbCaicL1DlpXlrTB","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaicL1DlpXlrTB","pdf",455302,"English","# Introduction\n## Critical inquiry and social justice commitments\n## The risk of “critical” in name only\n## Truth-telling, method, and scholarly paralysis\n# Methodological foundations\n## Praxis and the role of the truth-teller\n## Intellectual virtues in Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics","[{\"question\":\"How does the article define critical inquiry and truth-telling?\",\"answer\":\"It treats critical inquiry as ethically engaged truth-telling rather than technique-driven method. Truth-telling must account for ethical deliberation and the risks involved in speaking truth within complex discourse.\"},{\"question\":\"What role do phronesis and parrhesia play together?\",\"answer\":\"Phronesis frames truth as practical wisdom oriented toward ethical deliberation, while parrhesia emphasizes risk-bearing, engaged truth-telling grounded in the complexities of human discourse. Combined, they guide inquiry toward intentional, virtuous truth-telling practices.\"},{\"question\":\"Why does the article criticize some “critical” educational scholarship?\",\"answer\":\"It argues that much work labeled “critical” may be critical only in name, using methods that cannot intervene in the epistemological and ontological formations of normative educational practices. It also notes hesitation toward productive truth-telling in the context of debates about universal emancipatory politics.\"}]","Critical Inquiry as Virtuous Truth-Telling - Implications of Phronesis and Parrhesia | PDF",1792089404,48]