Pragmatic Encroachment and the Challenge from Epistemic Injustice

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

6 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

I present a challenge to epistemological pragmatic encroachment theories from epistemic injustice. The challenge invokes the idea that a knowing subject may be wronged by being regarded as lacking knowledge due to social identity prejudices. However, in an important class of such cases, pragmatic encroachers appear to be committed to the view that the subject does not know. Hence, pragmatic encroachment theories appear to be incapable of accounting for an important type of injustice – namely, discriminatory epistemic injustice. Consequently, pragmatic encroachment theories run the risk of obscuring or even sanctioning epistemically unjust judgments that arise due to problematic social stereotypes or unjust folk epistemological biases. In contrast, the epistemological view that rejects pragmatic encroachment – namely, strict purist invariantism – is capable of straightforwardly diagnosing the cases of discriminatory epistemic injustice as such. While the challenge is not a conclusive one, it calls for a response. Moreover, it illuminates very different conceptions of epistemology’s role in mitigating epistemic injustice.
Original languageEnglish
JournalPhilosophers' Imprint
Volume19
Issue number15
Pages (from-to)1-19
Publication statusPublished - May 2019

Fingerprint

Epistemic Injustice
Epistemological
Purist
Conception
Prejudice
Social Identity
Folk
Invariantism
Injustice
Stereotypes

Cite this

@article{b32562a9278b47e9b5e86c1f3ab5290c,
title = "Pragmatic Encroachment and the Challenge from Epistemic Injustice",
abstract = "I present a challenge to epistemological pragmatic encroachment theories from epistemic injustice. The challenge invokes the idea that a knowing subject may be wronged by being regarded as lacking knowledge due to social identity prejudices. However, in an important class of such cases, pragmatic encroachers appear to be committed to the view that the subject does not know. Hence, pragmatic encroachment theories appear to be incapable of accounting for an important type of injustice – namely, discriminatory epistemic injustice. Consequently, pragmatic encroachment theories run the risk of obscuring or even sanctioning epistemically unjust judgments that arise due to problematic social stereotypes or unjust folk epistemological biases. In contrast, the epistemological view that rejects pragmatic encroachment – namely, strict purist invariantism – is capable of straightforwardly diagnosing the cases of discriminatory epistemic injustice as such. While the challenge is not a conclusive one, it calls for a response. Moreover, it illuminates very different conceptions of epistemology’s role in mitigating epistemic injustice.",
author = "Mikkel Gerken",
year = "2019",
month = "5",
language = "English",
volume = "19",
pages = "1--19",
journal = "Philosophers' Imprint",
issn = "1533-628X",
publisher = "Michigan Publishing",
number = "15",

}

Pragmatic Encroachment and the Challenge from Epistemic Injustice. / Gerken, Mikkel.

In: Philosophers' Imprint, Vol. 19, No. 15, 05.2019, p. 1-19.

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal articleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Pragmatic Encroachment and the Challenge from Epistemic Injustice

AU - Gerken, Mikkel

PY - 2019/5

Y1 - 2019/5

N2 - I present a challenge to epistemological pragmatic encroachment theories from epistemic injustice. The challenge invokes the idea that a knowing subject may be wronged by being regarded as lacking knowledge due to social identity prejudices. However, in an important class of such cases, pragmatic encroachers appear to be committed to the view that the subject does not know. Hence, pragmatic encroachment theories appear to be incapable of accounting for an important type of injustice – namely, discriminatory epistemic injustice. Consequently, pragmatic encroachment theories run the risk of obscuring or even sanctioning epistemically unjust judgments that arise due to problematic social stereotypes or unjust folk epistemological biases. In contrast, the epistemological view that rejects pragmatic encroachment – namely, strict purist invariantism – is capable of straightforwardly diagnosing the cases of discriminatory epistemic injustice as such. While the challenge is not a conclusive one, it calls for a response. Moreover, it illuminates very different conceptions of epistemology’s role in mitigating epistemic injustice.

AB - I present a challenge to epistemological pragmatic encroachment theories from epistemic injustice. The challenge invokes the idea that a knowing subject may be wronged by being regarded as lacking knowledge due to social identity prejudices. However, in an important class of such cases, pragmatic encroachers appear to be committed to the view that the subject does not know. Hence, pragmatic encroachment theories appear to be incapable of accounting for an important type of injustice – namely, discriminatory epistemic injustice. Consequently, pragmatic encroachment theories run the risk of obscuring or even sanctioning epistemically unjust judgments that arise due to problematic social stereotypes or unjust folk epistemological biases. In contrast, the epistemological view that rejects pragmatic encroachment – namely, strict purist invariantism – is capable of straightforwardly diagnosing the cases of discriminatory epistemic injustice as such. While the challenge is not a conclusive one, it calls for a response. Moreover, it illuminates very different conceptions of epistemology’s role in mitigating epistemic injustice.

M3 - Journal article

VL - 19

SP - 1

EP - 19

JO - Philosophers' Imprint

JF - Philosophers' Imprint

SN - 1533-628X

IS - 15

ER -