Metaepistemic Injustice and Intellectual Disability: a Pluralist Account of Epistemic Agency

The literature on epistemic injustice currently displays a logocentric or propositional bias that excludes people with intellectual disabilities from the scope of epistemic agency and the demands of epistemic justice. This paper develops an account of epistemic agency and injustice that is inclusive...

Full description

Saved in:  
Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Catala, Amandine (Author)
Format: Electronic Article
Language:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Drawer...
Interlibrary Loan:Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany)
Published: [2020]
In: Ethical theory and moral practice
Year: 2020, Volume: 23, Issue: 5, Pages: 755-776
IxTheo Classification:NCC Social ethics
NCD Political ethics
VB Hermeneutics; Philosophy
Further subjects:B Epistemic (in)justice
B Logocentrism
B philosophical methodology
B Epistemic agency
B Non-propositional knowledge
B intellectual disability
B Metaepistemic injustice
Online Access: Volltext (Resolving-System)
Description
Summary:The literature on epistemic injustice currently displays a logocentric or propositional bias that excludes people with intellectual disabilities from the scope of epistemic agency and the demands of epistemic justice. This paper develops an account of epistemic agency and injustice that is inclusive of both people with and people without intellectual disabilities. I begin by specifying the hitherto undertheorized notion of epistemic agency. I develop a broader, pluralist account of epistemic agency, which relies on a conception of knowledge that accounts not only for propositional knowing, but also for other types of knowing that have been largely neglected in debates on epistemic injustice and agency. Based on this pluralist account of epistemic agency, I then show that people with intellectual disabilities qualify as epistemic agents and therefore as subjects of epistemic justice. Finally, I argue that this pluralist account of epistemic agency pushes us to revisit the current conception of epistemic injustice and to expand its taxonomy in two important ways.
ISSN:1572-8447
Contains:Enthalten in: Ethical theory and moral practice
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1007/s10677-020-10120-0