The Epistemology of Prejudice

Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
According to a common view, prejudice always involves some form of epistemic culpability, i.e., a failure to respond to evidence in the appropriate way. I argue that the common view wrongfully assumes that prejudices always involve universal generalizations. After motivating the more plausible thesis that prejudices typically involve a species of generic judgment, I show that standard examples provide no grounds for positing a strong connection between prejudice and epistemic culpability. More generally, the common view fails to recognize the extent to which prejudices are epistemically insidious: once they are internalized as background beliefs, they quite reasonably come to control the assessment and interpretation of new evidence. This property of insidiousness helps explain why prejudices are so recalcitrant to empirical counterevidence and also why they are frequently invisible to introspective reflection
PhilPapers/Archive ID
Revision history
Archival date: 2013-10-17
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

View all 13 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA
Faith and Epistemology.Ichikawa, Jonathan Jenkins
Implicit Bias.Brownstein, Michael

View all 17 citations / Add more citations

Added to PP index

Total views
846 ( #3,842 of 50,326 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
146 ( #3,034 of 50,326 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.