Miranda Fricker’s Concept of Epistemic Injustice
In Miranda Fricker’s article Testimonial Injustice, she highlights the significant effects for the connection of ethics and epistemology. Ethics is one of the philosophies’ branches that asks the question, “What is a good life or how to live a good life?” Epistemology is the theory of philosophy that ask the questions, “What do you know?” and “How do you know it?” Fricker basically, combines the two subjects at the matter and produced the concept of epistemic injustice. According to Fricker, epistemic injustices comes in the form of testimonial injustice.
Testimonial injustice involves preconceived opinions that are not based on reason or actual experience. In which, causes any individual to put a label on another individual’s words as a credibility deficit or a credibility excess. Fricker highlights, anyone can be a victim of epistemic injustices. In this paper, I will support Fricker’s argument that epistemic injustice creates wrongfully prejudgments about other’s credibility of their knowledge. She thinks that people should change their perceptions and then their beliefs to give people around them a fair chance to prove their credibility. I will be defending her through examples and back her up in some objection that other’s may have against her theory.
According to Fricker, epistemic injustice can occur every day because people tend to fill their minds with prejudicial stereotypes and social power. A disadvantage of
Kathryn Schulz argues in “Evidence”, a chapter of her book called Being Wrong, that we need to “learn to actively combat our inductive biases: to deliberately seek out evidence that challenges our beliefs, and to take seriously such evidence when we come across it” (Schulz, 377”). By attending to counterevidence we can avoid making errors in our conclusions.
This paper is going to discuss Ethics and Ethical Theories. It will include an introduction to ethical theories, virtue ethics, and care ethics. There will be sections discussing absolutism versus relativism, consequentialism versus deontological ethics, and lastly, free will versus determinism. It will also include a discussion about the study of morality and identify which of the approaches (Scientific, Philosophical, or Theological/Religious) are closest to my own personal beliefs. There will be a discussion regarding the three sources of ethics
Epistemological Foundationalism essentially claims that some empirical beliefs carry justification that does not require, or depend, on the justification of other empirical beliefs. In this essay, I intend to introduce the reading, “Can Empirical knowledge Have A foundation?” Written by Laurence Bonjour, to give a detailed summary of his arguments - as well as those who object to his - and ultimately to assert my belief that there is currently no example of an empirical belief that of which can be justified in an epistemic sense without avoiding reference to other empirical beliefs, which would then have to be justified themselves, not solving the regress problem.
the conclusion that bias plays a major role in the validity and credibility of documents and personal
As time goes by, ethical and moral issues have been brought up for long periods of time and these issues are recently becoming the rising problem to be discussed in society, business area and daily life. Most of people generally understand that the general meaning of ethics equals to the meaning of moral. However, moral is basically a matter of individual conscience without forcibleness, but ethics are related to social system with forcibleness. The academic definition of ethics is described as a stem of philosophy which raises moral questions and is demonstrated what is the main characteristic of morality and the way in which moral standards are decided (Gray & Webb, 2010).
The prejudice dilemma is exasperated by the distinctive treatment black people receive from the world, consequently strengthening the feeling of mediocrity in the colored community and forming their negative perspectives on whites. As Jablonski noted, associating “skin color with inferiority has been one of the most powerful and destructive intellectual ideas of all time, leading directly to slavery, civil war, and, more recently, segregation and apartheid.” Racial discrimination still causes hardships suffered by many people. Wilkins expresses deep concern regarding racial integration “not only because of the past but also because of the future.” Even though the former segregation laws have been done away
Injustice can be found everywhere in the world. It is in every household, every school, and every workplace. Examples of beliefs changing during adversity are shown in, The Nuremberg Trials, Gang Rape by Stephanie Chen, Perils of obedience by Stanley Milgram, Pearl Harbor Echoes In Seattle by Monica Sone, and the book Night by Elie Wiesel. In all these articles, Most of the time, it is people who cause injustice on others. But some choose to take a stand while others choose to participate. Participating can be a product of pressure and fear from others. Injustice on people can easily be prevented or eliminated as long as society has the courage to stand up for what is right and that people do not rely on other people to act first.
Clifford (1879) is a strong proponent of proof-based beliefs and of the continuous criticism of beliefs held backed by loose evidence. In order to advance as a fair and just society, our beliefs must be evaluated and supported by evidence which is fair and just, and not by apparent truisms which satisfy our personal power struggles, insecurities, and lack of interest.
There are a variety of different ethical systems that have developed of the course of millennia. However, even though the subject has been covered so thoroughly, it is still heavily debated. The varieties of ethical systems that are in existence look at various ethical problems from different perspectives and can be applied differently in different circumstances. Because of the subjective aspects to applying ethics, they can be as much an art as they are a science. Ethics are something that must be practiced and really cannot be perfected. In this way, studying ethics is a continual process that does not really stop. This paper will argue that ethics are the most important subject that an individual can pursue.
On the other hand, another injustice that is apparent in our society is inequality. It causes us to feel insecure, unimportant and unequal. People make others feel less with words and actions. Sometimes we do it subconsciously, meaning that we don’t think of the outcome and the damage that we cause them emotionally. When that happens, people feel like they don’t
Authoritative epistemology occurs when an analyst relies on another person’s authority to make a judgement. Their “basis of knowledge resides in a reference to something more
Communitarian critics of Rawls have argued that his A Theory of Justice provides an inadequate account of individuals in the original position. Michael Sandel, in Liberalism and the Limits of Justice argues that Rawls' conception of the person divorces any constitutive attachments that persons might have to their ends. Hence, Sandel asserts that Rawls privileges the standpoint of self-interested individuals at the expense of communal interests. I do not find Sandel's specific criticisms to be an accurate critique of what Rawls is doing in A Theory of Justice. However, this does not mean the more general thrust of the communitarian analysis of Rawls' conception of the person must be abandoned. By picking up the pieces
John Rawls discusses the original position in his book A Theory of Justice. “The Original Position and Justification” is a chapter where Rawls persuades his readers into taking the original position seriously. The original position is a position where people are equal and are rational in order to make principles that they live by fair. However, there is a problem with rational decisions being biased, where people will choose principles to benefit themselves. Therefore, the veil of ignorance will restrict a person’s knowledge about social status, intelligence, gender, race, ethnicity, and temperament. This will then define principles of justice that will not be advantage or a disadvantage to anyone in a society. Keeping this in mind, the purpose of this essay is to explain the reasons Rawls gives to favor the original position. I will then oppose to Rawls argument with two of my own reasons about the veil of ignorance not being realistic and the equal of human beings not being plausible.
Ethics, also known as moral philosophy, is a subject of philosophy that engages itself in systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong. It investigates questions of right and wrong and of the best way of living for people. In this essay I am going to explain the differences between the ethical schools of consequentialism, deontology, and virtue ethics and argue that in my opinion deontology is the most reasonable theory of the three.
Ethics is a branch of philosophy that involves systematizing, defending, and recommending concepts of right and wrong conduct (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy, 2017). In simple terms, ethics is the system of what is right and what is wrong. Usage of ethics on daily basis is important to a human being, a person is judged based on his/her behavior, whether it’s reasonable or aimless, ethics help people to have a purpose for their actions. Whether it’s during work or outside in open streets, it’s important to have basic ethical behavior. There are many types of ethical behavior that take place every single day. By being simply honest and kind, gives the other person an idea that you have ethics. This paper will cover