Knowledge Tree
testimonial injustice
Facts (16)
Sources
Social Epistemology - Open Encyclopedia of Cognitive Science oecs.mit.edu Jul 24, 2024 9 facts
claimKristie Dotson defines smothering as a form of testimonial injustice where speakers self-silence due to the fear that their words will be misconstrued in a way that causes harm to themselves or their marginalized community.
claimIn the context of testimonial injustice, 'silencing' occurs when a speaker is not taken seriously as a potential knower in the first place, rendering them unable to offer testimony.
claimKristie Dotson extends the analysis of testimonial injustice by introducing the concepts of silencing and smothering.
claimTestimonial injustice refers to cases where a hearer does not trust a speaker enough, whereas gaslighting involves inducing self-doubt in the would-be speaker.
claimIn the context of testimonial injustice, 'smothering' occurs when speakers self-silence due to fear that their words will be misconstrued in a way that causes further harm to themselves or their marginalized community, such as Black women in the United States choosing not to report domestic violence.
claimTestimonial injustice occurs when an individual gives less credence to the testimony of another person due to identity-based prejudices such as misogyny, racism, or classism.
claimMiranda Fricker characterizes the unjust discounting of testimony as a 'credibility deficit' and argues that individuals who systematically apply these deficits embody the epistemic vice of testimonial injustice.
claimKristie Dotson defines silencing as a form of testimonial injustice where a speaker is not taken seriously as a potential knower, preventing them from being in a position to offer testimony.
claimMiranda Fricker defines testimonial injustice as occurring when someone gives less credence to the testimony of another person due to identity-based prejudices such as misogyny, racism, or classism.
Social Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu Feb 26, 2001 4 facts
claimTestimonial injustice occurs when an audience gives less credence to a speaker than they deserve based on identity-based prejudice.
claimEmmalon Davis argued for the concept of credibility excess as a form of testimonial injustice in her 2016 paper 'Typecasts, tokens, and spokespersons: A case for credibility excess as testimonial injustice'.
accountMiranda Fricker illustrates testimonial injustice using the character Tom Robinson from the novel 'To Kill a Mockingbird', whose testimony as a Black man on trial for raping a white woman was prejudicially rejected by an all-white jury.
claimMiranda Fricker distinguishes between two kinds of epistemic injustice: testimonial injustice and hermeneutical injustice.
Virtue Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu Jul 9, 1999 2 facts
claimDavidson and Kelly (2015) argue that taking distal ecological control over one's material, social, and political environment can help eradicate biases leading to testimonial injustice, as adjusting credence in the moment is difficult.
claimWashington (2016) argues that the response to testimonial injustice should be to promote a social and moral ecology that facilitates the expression of values, rather than reflexively cultivating one's own character, because isolated individuals lack a 'Bad Judgment Alarm'.
Virtue Epistemology - Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy plato.stanford.edu Jul 9, 1999 1 fact
claimSherman (2016) questions the efficacy of cultivating virtues to correct testimonial injustice, despite agreeing with Fricker on the harm it causes.