Overview

Epistemic injustice refers to a wrong done to someone specifically in their capacity as a knower. Coined by Miranda Fricker, it highlights how prejudice can harm people’s ability to convey knowledge or make sense of their own experiences.

Core Idea

The core idea is that social power dynamics affect how knowledge is produced and shared. When prejudice causes us to deflate a person’s credibility or deny them the concepts to understand their experience, we commit an epistemic injustice.

Formal Definition

Epistemic injustice consists of two main types:

  1. Testimonial Injustice: When prejudice causes a hearer to give a deflated level of credibility to a speaker’s word (e.g., not believing a woman because of sexism).
  2. Hermeneutical Injustice: When a gap in collective interpretive resources puts someone at a disadvantage when trying to make sense of their social experiences (e.g., experiencing sexual harassment before the term existed).

Intuition

  • Testimonial: Imagine a doctor ignoring a patient’s description of pain because of the patient’s race or gender, assuming they are exaggerating. The patient is wronged as a source of knowledge.
  • Hermeneutical: Imagine suffering from postpartum depression in an era where it is not understood, and being labeled simply as “hysterical” or a “bad mother.” You lack the collective tools to understand your own suffering.

Examples

  • To Kill a Mockingbird: The jury refuses to believe Tom Robinson’s truthful testimony simply because he is Black. (Testimonial Injustice).
  • “Sexual Harassment”: Before the 1970s, women experienced workplace harassment but had no name for it, making it difficult to report or even fully conceptualize as a systemic wrong. (Hermeneutical Injustice).

Common Misconceptions

  • Misconception: It’s just about being polite.
    • Correction: It is a distinct epistemic harm; it degrades the person’s status as a rational agent and prevents truth from being known.
  • Misconception: It only happens to minorities.
    • Correction: While marginalized groups are disproportionately affected, it can happen to anyone against whom there is identity prejudice.
  • Epistemic Violence: A broader term for harm caused through knowledge practices (e.g., silencing).
  • Standpoint Theory: The idea that marginalized groups have a unique epistemic vantage point.
  • Gaslighting: Manipulating someone into doubting their own sanity or perception (a form of epistemic abuse).

Applications

  • Healthcare: Addressing racial and gender bias in pain management and diagnosis.
  • Law: Ensuring fair assessment of witness credibility.
  • Education: Recognizing diverse forms of knowledge and expression in the classroom.

Criticism and Limitations

  • Scope: Some argue the concept is too broad and risks labeling all misunderstandings as “injustice.”
  • Individual vs. Structural: Debates continue over whether the primary remedy is individual virtue (listening better) or structural change.

Further Reading

  • Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing by Miranda Fricker
  • The Epistemology of Resistance by José Medina
  • Black Feminist Thought by Patricia Hill Collins