1 / 21

Understanding Privileged Epistemic Standpoints

Explore the concept of epistemic privilege through feminist standpoints and the implications of active ignorance. Discover how social locations and perspectives shape knowledge claims and justifications. Uncover the role of perspectives in determining epistemic privilege and overcoming relativity. Learn how to overcome active ignorance and rank perspectives based on ethical values.

Download Presentation

Understanding Privileged Epistemic Standpoints

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Active Ignorance and Privileged Epistemic Standpoints Alessandra Tanesini May 2019

  2. The Plan • Situated knowledge and epistemically privileged standpoints • Three interpretations of situatedness and epistemic advantage • Situatedness, privilege, inversion and relativity • The achievement of standpoint as the overcoming of active ignorance

  3. What are Feminist Standpoints? • Situated Knowledge thesis: (many) knowledge claims about social reality are socially situated at least because they are based on putative evidence that is more accessible from some perspectives rather than others (Wylie, 2003: 31; Intemann, 2010: 784–787). • Standpoint thesis: some socially situated perspectives (standpoints) are epistemically privileged in that they offer a less partial, less distorted understanding or because they contain a higher number of (significant) truths than those provided by other perspectives (Intemann, 2010: 787–789). • Inversion thesis: perspective(s) of the socially subordinated are epistemically privilegedcompared with those of dominant groups (Wylie, 2003: 26).

  4. Three interpretations of situatedness • Situated Knowledge thesis: (many) knowledge claims about social reality are socially situated at least because they are based on putative evidence that is more accessible from some perspectives rather than others (Wylie, 2003: 31; Intemann, 2010: 784–787). • 1. Knowledge claims depend on the evidence and social locations shape access to evidence • 2. Knowledge claims depend on the presumed reliability of the methods used to arrive at them, and social locations shape which methods one uses • 3. Knowledge claims depend for their justification on social perspectives.

  5. Situatedness and privilege • 1. Knowledge claims depend on the evidence and social locations shape access to evidence. • Privileged perspectives are those that comprise better quality evidence. • 2. Knowledge claims depend on the presumed reliability of the methods used to arrive at them, and social locations shape which methods one uses • Privileged perspectives are those that comprise the more reliable methods. • 3. Knowledge claims depend for their justification on social perspectives. • Privileged perspectives are those that justify a larger number of significant truths

  6. Privilege and inversion • 1. Privileged perspectives are those that comprise better quality evidence. • 2. Privileged perspectives are those that comprise the more reliable methods. • Perspectives in these two interpretations are not likely to be shared among members of a social group and if they were they are unlikely to be privileged. • 3. Privileged perspectives are those that justify a larger number of significant truths. • Perspective is not automatically associated with social group membership but can be associated with the interests of a social group.

  7. Privilege and Relativity • In the third interpretation, justification of a knowledge claim is dependent (in the sense of relative) on perspectives. • S’s claim that p is justified versus S’s claim that p is justified-in-A (where A is a perspective) • Emancipatory perspectives are epistemically privileged relative to the pursuit of emancipatory goals. • Which perspectives are epistemically privileged seems to be wholly dependent on which goals are worth pursuing.

  8. Strenghthing the appearance of relativity: An Example • Two conceptions of divorce (Anderson, 2004): • As break-up of family • As separation of spousal and parental roles • Alternative conceptions lead to framing different questions, using different methods, collecting different data.

  9. Overcoming relativity: Not all values are equal • There is no neutral perspective on how to assess which truths are significant. • Significance is relative to goals and values. • So, it would seem that there is no neutral way to evaluate the epistemic superiority of any perspective relative to any other. • Not all values and goals are on a par. • The epistemically privileged perspectives are those that lead to more truth that are significant, given the set of ethical values that we ought to endorse. • But there is plurality of ethical values and perhaps some cannot be simultaneously accepted nor ranked.

  10. Overcoming relativity, Overcoming active Ignorance • Rank perspectives by an internal epistemic standard. • Privileged perspectives are those that: • (1) are not sustained and preserved by systemic active ignorance • (2) do not promote motivations leading to motivated active ignorance

  11. What is Ignorance • Ignorance as • False belief that p • Withholding belief as to whether p • Never thought of p • Plain ignorance is ignorance that is the result of accident, bad luck, cognitive limitation or shortcoming • Active ignorance is ignorance that is the result of social and/or psychological mechanisms whose function is to produce, preserve or transmit ignorance

  12. Active Ignorance • Three forms of active ignorance: • Motivated ignorance: ignorance that is the outcome of processes motivated by a (not wholly conscious) desire not to know. • Deliberate Ignorance: ignorance that is the result of others’ activities that intentionally spread false information or are designed to engender doubt and confusion. • Systemic ignorance: ignorance that is the result of occupying cognitive niches that systematically facilitate ignorance and whose success at fostering ignorance make them self-sustaining.

  13. False ideologies as systemic active ignorance • Perspective comprise ideologies understood as account making sense of current practices using a specific conceptual framework. • Some of these promote ignorance. • Explanation of why women abandon the labour market after the first child as a rational choice. • It is a ‘rational choice’ but calling it such obscures understanding the situation.

  14. Motivated ignorance • Some ignorance is self-serving (e.g., not seeing dust) • It is the result of a desire not to know, e.g., obliviousness to the prevalence of sexual harassment or to racist behaviour. • Some perspectives including ideologies set standards for what is significance. • These standards might play a role in developing in patterns of attention and inattention resulting in motivated ignorance.

  15. Staying Ignorant • Active ignorance is often enabled by and sustains habits of attention and inattention. • What we see depends on where we look. • How we evaluate and understand partly depends on what we see. • Looking in the wrong places sustains • False belief or doubts • Avoidance of cognition

  16. Ignorance as a Luxury • Psychologically speaking, ignorance is often easier to manage by avoiding thought than by resisting the rational update of false belief • Avoidance of thought is a luxury • e.g., only white people can afford to be knowingly ignorant about race • e.g., entitled people can avoid facing evidence of their own abilities by self- handicapping (Lupien et al., 2010). • Ignorance by avoidance is enabled by material and social privilege.

  17. Knowledge out of necessity • Individuals who faces challenges because of discrimination have an interest in gaining accurate understanding of the situation and of how the situation appears to those who are privileged. • Double consciousness (Hill Collins).

  18. Standpoints as the achievement of Overcoming Ignorance • Situatedness: Knowledge claims depend for their justification on social perspectives • Privilege: Some perspectives are less systemically ignorant and promote less motivated ignorance. • Inversion: Members of socially subordinated groups are, out of necessity, more likely to overcome their active ignorance. • That said standpoint is an achievement that is possible but challenging for all.

  19. THANKS!

More Related