Skip to main content

ETHNOS_APP

Home • Search • Journals • List 0

Review of Catala’s The Dynamics of Epistemic Injustice

Bibliographic Data

ID24228252
AuthorsEmily Colleen McWilliams (University of Dayton)
Year2026
Pages1-5
Publication date2026-09-24
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueHypatia (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 0887-5367 • E-ISSN: 1527-2001
PublisherCambridge University Press (CUP) (PUBLISHER)
DOI10.1017/hyp.2026.10105
OpenAlexW7214212816
LanguageEN
References cited6

The Dynamics of Epistemic Injustice: Situating Epistemic Power and Agency is essential reading for anyone interested in social epistemology.Since Fricker (2007) introduced the term, work on epistemic injustice has grown tremendously, with scholars identifying new types that pressure the original framework.The field needed systematic examination of core concepts and their relationships.What is epistemic agency?What is epistemic power?How do they relate to epistemic injustice?Catala addresses these questions through sustained engagement with concrete cases including intellectual disability, academic migration, and colonial memory.Two contributions are central: (1) pluralist accounts of epistemic agency, power, and injustice, and (2) a structural account of how these relate.These challenge two implicit assumptions in the literature.The logocentric bias assumes knowledge is mainly propositional, narrowing who counts as an epistemic agent and what forms epistemic injustice can take.The interpersonal bias assumes epistemic agency is undermined primarily in individual interactions, obscuring how structural factors affect epistemic agency and create power asymmetries before anyone acts.Catala's pluralist accounts reveal the logocentric bias's limits.Beyond propositional knowledge, Chapter 1 identifies four types of implicit knowing: practical (know-how), tacit (unarticulated background assumptions structuring interactions), embodied (firstperson knowledge from the body), and affective (first-person knowledge from affect).This generates a pluralist account of epistemic agency: "the capacity to display, convey, use, or produce explicit or implicit types of knowing" (p.35).She specifies this along four dimensions: epistemic objects (five types of knowing), expressive modes (verbal and non-verbal), contributing factors (internal and external), and stages (having, exercising, and successfully exercising agency).Importantly, the expressive modes for nonpropositional epistemic agency need not be verbal.This affects who counts as an epistemic agent.People with severe intellectual disabilities, who cannot communicate verbally, are not recognized as subjects of epistemic injustice on the logocentric account.But they exercise practical epistemic agency through performance, tacit agency through behavior conforming to norms, embodied agency through physical expressions, and affective agency through emotional displays.Restricting epistemic agency to propositional knowledge commits what Catala calls meta-epistemic injustice: epistemic injustice at the methodological level.

epistemic authority · epistemic injustice · Social epistemology · Educational Strategies and Epistemologies · Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics · Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies

  • Tracking Epistemic Violence, Tracking Practices of Silencing

    Open Access•Kristie Dotson•Hypatia•2011

  • What is a speaker owed

    Open Access•Sanford C Goldberg•Philosophy & Public Affairs•2022

Highly citedNo

Tools

Open DOIOpen Access
Ethnos_APP • Open Source Project • MIT License • Frontend v2.0.0 • Privacy and Cookies • API Documentation: api.ethnos.app/docs • API Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17049435 • Frontend Source Code: GitHub • DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.17050053 • cruz.rio.br • Expectantes Misericordiae