Abstract
Social justice demands that we attend carefully to the epistemic terrains we inhabit as well as to the epistemic resources we summon to make our lived experiences tangible to one another. Not all epistemic terrains are hospitable—colonial projects landscaped a good portion of our epistemic terrain long before present generations moved across it. There is no shared epistemicterra firma,no level epistemic common ground where knowers share credibility and where a diversity of hermeneutical resources play together happily. Knowers engage one another on a politically saturated,unlevel knowing fieldwhere members of dominant groups work to forcibly maintain their epistemic home-terrain advantage. I use the metaphor of the unlevel knowing field to capture these oppressive epistemic structures. The unlevel knowing field is a hungry place where all knowledge that fails to nurture and sustain dominant ways knowing risks being dragged onto the dominator's epistemic home turf to be mined, coopted, consumed, or destroyed. Knowledge and willful ignorance circulate with equal vigor in this hungry world. From the standpoint of oppressed/resisting peoples, the unlevel knowing field is a minefield, an epistemic twilight zone, which must be traversed with considerable care and endless attention. The harms epistemic injustice produces are not disembodied harms. Repeated acts of injustice (epistemic or otherwise) weather our bodies, dull our minds, weaken our hearts, and traumatize the spirit of our communities. They create public-health precarities and invite mental, emotional, physical, and spiritual illness into our being. Epistemic oppression is a cruel thief. It is disorienting, exhausting, and deadly. It triggers anger, anxiety, depression, and resistance. It steals our time, energy, and attention away from more beautiful things.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Philosophy,Gender Studies
Reference6 articles.
1. Decolonization is not a metaphor;Tuck;Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education and Society,2012
2. Cultural Gaslighting;Ruíz;Hypatia,2020
3. Locke, John . 1 March 1669. The Fundamental Constitutions of Carolina. https://avalon.law.yale.edu/17th_century/nc05.asp
4. Theorizing multiple oppressions through colonial history: Cultural alterity and Latin American feminisms;Ruíz;APA Newsletter on Hispanic/Latino Issues in Philosophy,2012
5. Gaslighting and Echoing, or Why Collective Epistemic Resistance is not a “Witch Hunt”;Pohlhaus;Hypatia,2020
Cited by
15 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献