Duration: 2024-2025
Code: CIGE/2023/008
Principal Investigator: Manuel Almagro (UV)
SUMMARY
Epistemic and speech injustices are garnering increasing attention in the specialized literature of social epistemology and political philosophy of language. These issues not only stand as important subjects within practical philosophy but also provide an illuminating context to explore more classic philosophical questions, such as the nature of knowledge and the prerequisites for specific speech acts. This project’s primary goal is to offer novel insights that deepen our comprehension of these injustices. It will also establish a structured classification of the various epistemic and linguistic elements exhibited across different phenomena falling under the broad category of “epistemic and speech injustices”, and explore their presence in different areas, such as mental health and the domains of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM).
ESPEECHI is organized into two primary modules,. The first module delves into the nature of epistemic and speech injustices, while the second one ventures into domains where these injustices are more recently explored.
Module 1: The Nature of Epistemic and Speech Injustices.
Module 1’s Working Hypotheses
- Social structures and practices are especially relevant to account for, and intervene in, cases of epistemic and speech injustices.
- Deep disagreements could be helpful in alleviating epistemic and speech injustices.
- There are alternative approaches to speech act theory that can address and account better for speech injustice cases.
- Offensiveness and certain speech injustices are two sides of the same coin if approached from a certain view on normativity.
Module 2: Epistemic and Speech Injustices: Exploring New Territories.
Module 2’s Working Hypotheses
- The psychiatric context, given its implications, has specific particularities that, although they can help us better understand epistemic and speech injustices, the conclusions and policies derived from research within this context cannot be generalized and extrapolated to other contexts.
- Appealing to subjective interests to explain gender and race gaps in STEM is misleading and harmful, because it hides some discriminatory practices and institutional structures, which foster epistemic and speech injustice situations, that contribute to these gaps.
Funded by Generalitat Valenciana – Conselleria de Educación, Cultura, Universidades y Empleo.