Overview
Traditional epistemology imagines a lone thinker (Rodin’s Thinker) figuring out the world. Social epistemology recognizes that 99% of what we know comes from other people (books, teachers, scientists).
Core Idea
Testimony: Relying on the word of others. Is it a fundamental source of knowledge (like eyesight), or do we need to verify it first?
Formal Definition (if applicable)
Epistemic Injustice: When someone is wronged in their capacity as a knower.
- Testimonial Injustice: Not believing someone because of prejudice (e.g., ignoring a woman’s testimony).
- Hermeneutical Injustice: When a group lacks the concepts to understand their own experience (e.g., before the term “sexual harassment” existed).
Intuition
- Experts: When should you trust a scientist over your own gut?
- Echo Chambers: When groups reinforce their own biases and exclude outside views.
- Wikipedia: A prime example of social knowledge construction.
Examples
- Peer Review: Science’s social mechanism for truth-checking.
- Juries: A group trying to determine the facts.
- Democracy: Can the “wisdom of crowds” solve political problems?
Common Misconceptions
- “Think for yourself.” (Impossible. You can’t verify the atomic weight of gold yourself. You have to trust the chemists.)
- “Truth is social.” (Social Constructivism). Some things are socially constructed (money), but others aren’t (gravity).
Related Concepts
- Groupthink: When the desire for harmony leads to bad decisions.
- Filter Bubbles: Algorithms showing you only what you agree with.
- Standpoint Epistemology: The view that marginalized groups have special access to certain truths.
Applications
- Media Literacy: Evaluating sources.
- AI: How to prevent bots from spreading misinformation.
- Law: Handling expert witnesses.
Criticism / Limitations
Blind trust in authority is dangerous. We need a balance between trust and skepticism.
Further Reading
- Fricker, Epistemic Injustice
- Goldman, Knowledge in a Social World