In this paper, we have two goals. First, we argue for a blueprint for hermeneutical injustice that allows us to schematize existing and discover new varieties of hermeneutical injustices. The underlying insight is that Fricker provides both a general concept of hermeneutical injustice and a specific conception thereof. By distinguishing between the general concept and its specific conceptions, we gain a fruitful tool to detect such injustices in our everyday lives. Second, we use this blueprint to provide a further example of hermeneutical injustice that draws our attention to yet another distinction: Some hermeneutical injustices result from a lack or distortion in the collective conceptual resource and some are due to problems in the application of existing concepts. We argue that to combat hermeneutical injustices, we have to make sure not only that individuals have accurate concepts at their disposal but that they have the capabilities to use these concepts adequately.
We are grateful for the opportunity to present this paper at the Workshop Feminist Theories in Political Philosophy in Bern organized by Anna Goppel and Christian Budnik, at the Munich Colloquium for Ethics organized by Jan-Christoph Heilinger and at the XXVI. DKPhil in Berlin and we thank the participants of these events for their helpful feedback. The paper benefitted enormously from the critical remarks and suggestions by Matt Congdon, Deborah Mühlebach and Tamara Jugov and the anonymous reviewers. Special thanks to Justus-Lou Witte for help with the final manuscript.
Antony, L. 2012. “Different Voices or Perfect Storm: Why are there so Few Women in Philosophy?” Journal of Social Philosophy 43 (3): 227–55, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9833.2012.01567.x.Search in Google Scholar
Beebee, H., and J. Saul. 2011. Women in Philosophy in the UK. Report by the British Philosophical Association and SWIP UK. www.bpa.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/BPA_Report_Women_In_Philosophy.pdf (accessed January 17, 2021).Search in Google Scholar
Di Bella, L., E. Miles, and J. Saul. 2016. “Philosophers Explicitly Associate Philosophy with Maleness: An Examination of Implicit and Explicit Gender Stereotypes in Philosophy.” In Implicit Bias and Philosophy, Vol. 1, edited by M. Brownstein, and J. Saul, 283–308. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198713241.003.0012Search in Google Scholar
Du Bois, W. E. B. 2007/1903. The Souls of Black Folks. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Fricker, M. 2016. “Epistemic Injustice and the Preservation of Ignorance.” In The Epistemic Dimensions of Ignorance, edited by R. Peels, and M. Blaauw, 160–77. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9780511820076.010Search in Google Scholar
Kristjánsson, K. 1992. “For a Concept of Negative Liberty – but Which Conception?” Journal of Applied Philosophy 9 (2): 221–31, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-5930.1992.tb00311.x.Search in Google Scholar
Medina, J. 2017. “Varieties of Hermeneutical Injustice.” In The Routledge Handbook of Epistemic Injustice, edited by I. Kidd, J. Medina, and G. Pohlhaus, 41–52. London/New York: Routledge.10.4324/9781315212043-4Search in Google Scholar
Mills, C. 2013. “White Ignorance and Hermeneutical Injustice. A Comment on Medina and Fricker.” Social Epistemology Review and Reply Collective 3: 38–43.Search in Google Scholar
Paxton, M., C. Figdor, and V. Tiberius. 2012. “Quantifying the Gender Gap: An Empirical Study of the Under representation of Women in Philosophy.” Hypatia 4: 949–57, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2012.01306.x.Search in Google Scholar
Saul, J. 2013. “Implicit Bias, Stereotype Threat, and Women in Philosophy.” In Women in Philosophy: What Needs to Change?, edited by K. Hutchison, and F. Jenkins, 39–60. Oxford et al: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199325603.003.0003Search in Google Scholar
Sen, A. 1999. Development as Freedom. New York: Knopf.Search in Google Scholar
Simion, M. 2019. “Hermeneutical Injustice as Basing Failure.” In Well-Founded Belief: New Essays on the Epistemic Basing Relation, edited by P. Bondy, and A. Carter, 177–89. London et al: Routledge.10.4324/9781315145518-10Search in Google Scholar
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston