Switch to: References

Citations of:

Epistemic Trespassing

Mind 128 (510):367-395 (2019)

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Epistemic Injustice and the Attention Economy.Leonie Smith & Alfred Archer - 2020 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 23 (5):777-795.
    In recent years, a significant body of literature has emerged on the subject of epistemic injustice: wrongful harms done to people in their capacities as knowers. Up to now this literature has ignored the role that attention has to play in epistemic injustice. This paper makes a first step towards addressing this gap. We argue that giving someone less attention than they are due, which we call an epistemic attention deficit, is a distinct form of epistemic injustice. We begin by (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • The Humility Heuristic Or: People Worth Trusting Admit to What They Don’T Know.Mattias Skipper - forthcoming - Social Epistemology:1-14.
    People don't always speak the truth. When they don't, we do better not to trust them. Unfortunately, that's often easier said than done. People don't usually wear a ‘Not to be trusted!’ badge on their sleeves, which lights up every time they depart from the truth. Given this, what can we do to figure out whom to trust, and whom not? My aim in this paper is to offer a partial answer to this question. I propose a heuristic—the “Humility Heuristic”—which (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Moral Market Design.Sam Fox Krauss - 2019 - Kansas Journal of Law and Public Policy 28 (2).
    We often encounter people who we believe are behaving immorally. We routinely try to change minds and often donate to charitable organizations that do the same. Of course, this does not always work. In a liberal, rights-based society, we have to tolerate this. But legal entitlements to act in ways that others find immoral are inefficiently allocated. For example, some meat-eaters value eating meat less than some vegetarians would be willing to pay them to stop. While many have written about (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • A Panpsychist Interpretation of Anne Conway's Metaphysics.Andrew Fyffe - 2020 - Aporia 20:1-9.
    This paper proposes a panpsychist interpretation of Anne Conway’s (1631-1679) metaphysics, as elucidated in 'The Principles of the Most Ancient and Modern Philosophy.' Contemporary versions of panpsychism attempt to explain how consciousness is realised in the natural world. They posit that matter is intrinsically experiential, such that when it is arranged into the form of a human brain, it gives rise to human consciousness. Similarly, Conway argues that substance is constituted by both Body and Spirit. The former serves as an (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Peer Idealization and Internal Examples in the Epistemology of Disagreement.Tim Kenyon - 2020 - Dialogue 59 (1):69-79.
    The epistemology of disagreement has developed around a highly idealized notion of epistemic peers. The analysis of examples in the literature has somewhat entrenched this idealization, when using cases of extant philosophical disputes between named interlocutors. These examples make it hard to emphasize the ordinary ways in which discussants, as disciplinary colleagues, may be wrong. Overlooking these possibilities is probably made easier by widespread attitudes in philosophy about the importance of genius or raw intelligence in doing philosophy. The use of (...)
    Download  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Traditional, Not the Usual: On Misrepresenting Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome Network Lower Tidal Volume Trial.Peter Shiu-Hwa Tsu - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (1):54-56.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Can Novices Trust Themselves to Choose Trustworthy Experts? Reasons for (Reserved) Optimism.Johnny Brennan - 2020 - Social Epistemology 34 (3):227-240.
    Novices face a problem when it comes to forming true beliefs about controversial issues that they cannot assess themselves: Who are the trustworthy experts? Elizabeth Anderson offers a set of criteria intended to allow novices to form reliable assessments of expert trustworthiness. All they need to assess experts is a high-school education and access to the internet. In this paper, I argue that novices face a much harder time using her criteria effectively than we would expect or hope. This problem (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • From Epistemic Trespassing to Transdisciplinary Cooperation: The Role of Expertise in the Identification of Usual Care.Joseph Michael Vukov, Kit Rempala, Molly Klug & Marley Hornewer - 2020 - American Journal of Bioethics 20 (1):52-54.
    According to Macklin & Natanson (2019), one reason unusual practices can be misidentified as usual care is that “instead of using pertinent, accurate information describing usual care, investigators may rely on the opinion of ‘experts’ in the field, whose information may be out of date or otherwise inaccurate." We find Macklin & Natanson’s insights about misattributed expertise crucial, and suggest their discussion can be elucidated further by characterizing it in the context of Ballantyne (2018)’s recent exploration of what he calls (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Expert Trespassing Testimony and the Ethics of Science Communication.Mikkel Gerken - 2018 - Journal for General Philosophy of Science / Zeitschrift für Allgemeine Wissenschaftstheorie 49 (3):299-318.
    Scientific expert testimony is crucial to public deliberation, but it is associated with many pitfalls. This article identifies one—namely, expert trespassing testimony—which may be characterized, crudely, as the phenomenon of experts testifying outside their domain of expertise. My agenda is to provide a more precise characterization of this phenomenon and consider its ramifications for the role of science in society. I argue that expert trespassing testimony is both epistemically problematic and morally problematic. Specifically, I will argue that scientific experts are (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   4 citations