DOI: https://doi.org/10.17072/2078-7898/2022-2-197-207

«Kaleidoscope» of feminist epistemologies

Nina Yu. Ignatova
Doctor of Philosophy, Docent,
Professor of the Department of Humanitarian and Social and Economic EducationNizhny Tagil Technological Institute (Branch) of Ural Federal University,
59, Krasnogvardeyskaya st., Nizhny Tagil, Sverdlovsk Oblast, 622013, Russia;
e-mail: nina1316@yandex.ru
ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0563-5422
ResearcherID: AAG-4874-2020

The paper explores the ideas of feminist epistemologies in the 21st century: skepticism about objectivity, intersectional approach, epistemic injustice, etc. The author investigates the concepts of a hermeneutic gap, gaslighting and meta-ignorance, and gives the implications of these terms in higher education. The term «feminist epistemologies» is used in the paper in the plural since the attempts of oppressed groups to return the value of their own experience cannot be manifested in the existence of the only one universal epistemology. Rethinking the concepts of «knowledge», «knowing» with regard to women, disabled people, representatives of different races, sexual minorities becomes the core for the development of trans-epistemology, queer-epistemology, creep-epistemology, epistemology of resistance, epistemology of ignorance, etc. A particular contribution of feminist epistemologies is the attention to values and vested interests of privileged and oppressed groups in the sphere of knowledge production, which allows expanding the use of the concepts of epistemic injustice, epistemic advantage, and epistemic ignorance. The author raises a question: if power can lead to epistemic ignorance, while oppression, in turn — to epistemological advantage, does it mean that knowers from marginalized groups have the most complete knowledge? While there are many different research positions, none of the feminist epistemologies puts forward such a simplistic understanding of the connection between power and knowledge. The author argues that the relationship between knowledge and power cannot be described in such a way that the value of one’s knowledge will increase while the power of oppressed groups will decrease. The study shows that feminist epistemologies are a «kaleidoscope» of alternative or «marginal» epistemologies.

Keywords: feminist epistemology, intersectional approach, epistemic injustice, epistemic advantage, epistemic ignorance, gaslighting, hermeneutic gap.

References

Abramson, K. (2014). Turning up the lights on gaslighting. Philosophical Perspectives. Vol. 28, iss. 1, рр. 1–30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/phpe.12046

Alcoff, L. and Potter, E. (eds.) (1993). Feminist epistemologies. New York: Routledge Publ., 324 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203760093

Code, L. (1991). What can she know? Feminist theory and construction of knowledge. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 368 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7591/9781501735738

Collins, P. (2017). [Representation of African American women. Interview with Patricia Hill Collins]. Global’nyy dialog [Global Dialogue]. Vol. 7, iss. 1, рр. 15–16. 

Crenshaw, K. (1988). Race, reform, and retrenchment: Transformation and legitimation in antidiscrimination law. Harvard Law Review. Vol. 101, no. 7, рр. 1331–1387. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1341398

Crenshaw, K. (1991). Mapping the margins: intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of Colo. Stanford Law Review. Vol. 43, no. 6, рр. 1241–1299. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1229039

Dotson, K. (2012). A cautionary tale: on limiting epistemic oppression. Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies. Vol. 33, no. 1, рр. 24–47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5250/fronjwomestud.33.1.0024

Dotson, K. (2014) Conceptualizing epistemic oppression. Social Epistemology. Vol. 28, iss. 2, рр. 115–138. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02691728.2013.782585

Essig, L. (2014). [«Bury their hearts»: some thoughts on the spectre of homosexuality hauntig in Russia]. Na pereput’e: metodologiya, teoriya i praktika LGBT i kvir-issledovaniy, pod red. A.A. Kondakova [A.A. Kondakov (ed.) On the crossroads: methodology, theory and practice of LGBT and queer studies]. St. Peterburg: CISR Publ., рр. 3–23.

Fricker, M. (2007). Epistemic injustice: power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press, 208 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198237907.001.0001

Garland-Thomson, R. (2011). Misfits: a feminist materialist disability concept. Hypatia. Vol. 26, iss. 3, рр. 591–609. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2011.01206.x

Garland-Thomson, R. (2016). «Becoming disabled». The New York Times, Aug. 19. Available at: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/21/opinion/sunday/becoming-disabled.html (accessed 01.02.2022).

Grasswick, H. (2018). Feminist social epistemology. E.N. Zalta (ed.) The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2018/entries/feminist-social-epistemology/ (accessed 01.02.2022).

Hall, M.C. (2019). Critical disability theory. E.N. Zalta (ed.) The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. Available at: https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2019/entries/disability-critical/ (accessed 01.02.2022).

Hamraie, A. (2013). Designing collective access: a feminist disability theory of universal design. Disability Studies Quarterly. Vol. 33, no. 4. Available at: https://dsq-sds.org/article/view/3871 (accessed 01.02.2022). DOI: https://doi.org/10.18061/dsq.v33i4.3871

Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledges: the science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies. Vol. 14, no. 3, рр. 575–599. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/3178066

Harding, S.G. (1987). Introduction. Is there a Feminist Method? Feminism and Methodology. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press, pp. 1–14.

Laudan, L. (1990). Demystifying underdetermination. C. Wade Savage (ed.) Scientific Theories. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 267–297.

McKinnon, R.V. (2015). Trans*formative experiences. Res Philosophica. Vol. 92, iss. 2, рр. 419–440. DOI: https://doi.org/10.11612/resphil.2015.92.2.12

Medina, J. (2012). Hermeneutical injustice and polyphonic contextualisms: social silences and shared hermeneutical responsibilities. Social Epistemology. Vol. 26, iss. 2, рр. 201–220. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02691728.2011.652214

Medina, J. (2013). The epistemology of resistance: gender and racial oppression, epistemic injustice, and resistant imaginations. New York: Oxford University Press, 352 р.

Moya, P. (2011). Who we are and from where we speak. TRANSMODERNITY: Journal of Peripheral Cultural Production of the Luso-Hispanic World. Vol. 1, iss. 2, рр. 79–94. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5070/t412011809

Narayan, U. (2000). Undoing the «Package Picture» of Cultures. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society. Vol. 25, iss. 4, pp. 1083–1086. Available at: https://www.jstor.org/stable/3175491 (accessed 01.02.2022). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/495524

Ortega, M. (2006). Being lovingly, knowingly ignorant: white feminism and women of color. Hypatia. Vol. 21, iss. 3, рр. 56–74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2006.tb01113.x

Rolin, K. (2006). The bias paradox in feminist standpoint epistemology. Episteme. Vol. 3, no. 1–2, рр. 125–136. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3366/epi.2006.3.1-2.125

Rolin, K. (2021). Objectivity, trust and social responsibility. Synthese. Vol. 199, iss. 2, pp. 513–533. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-020-02669-1

Ruíz, E. (2020). Cultural gaslighting. Hypatia. Vol. 35, iss. 4, рр. 687–713. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/hyp.2020.33

Simpson, L.B. (2014). Land as pedagogy: Nishnaabeg intelligence and rebellious transformation. Decolonization: Indigeneity, Education & Society. Vol. 3, no. 3. Available at: https://jps.library.utoronto.ca/index.php/des/article/view/22170 (accessed 01.02.2022).

Shevchenko, S.Yu. (2020). [Incline and admonish: epistemic injustice and counter-expertise]. Epistemologiya i filosofiya nauki[Epistemology & Philosophy of Science]. Vol. 57, no. 2, pр. 20–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/eps202057217

Spear, A. (2020). Gaslighting, confabulation, and epistemic innocence. Topoi. Vol. 39, iss. 1, pр. 229–241. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11245-018-9611-z

Stockdale, K. (2021). Hope under oppression. New York: Oxford University Press, 232 p. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197563564.001.0001

Tartakovskaya, I.N. (2015). [The gender order reproduction via career strategies: Intersectional analyses]. Sotsiologicheskie issledovaniya [Sociological Studies]. Vol. 5, рр. 84–93.

Temkina, A.A. (2008). Seksual’naya zhizn’ zhenschiny: mezhdu svobodoy i podchineniem [Sexual life of women: between freedom and submission]. St. Petersburg: EUSP Press, 376 p.

Temkina, A.A. and Zdravomyslova, E.A. (2017). [Intersectional turn in gender studies]. Zhurnal sotsiologii i sotsial’noy antropologii [The Journal of Sociology and Social Anthropology]. Vol. 20, no. 5, рр. 15–38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.31119/jssa.2017.20.5.2

Tischenko P.D. (2020). [Epistemic injustice as systemic communicative dysfunction]. Epistemologiya i filosofiya nauki[Epistemology & Philosophy of Science]. Vol. 57, no. 2, pр. 42–47. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/eps202057219

Trufanova, E.O. (2017). [«Situated knowledge» and the ideal of objectivity in science]. Epistemologiya i filosofiya nauki[Epistemology & Philosophy of Science]. Vol. 54, no. 4, рр. 99–110. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5840/eps201754475

Tuana, N. (2006). The speculum of ignorance: women’s health movement and epistemologies of ignorance. Hypatia. Vol. 21, iss. 3, рр. 1–19. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1527-2001.2006.tb01110.x

Williams, P.J. (1991). The alchemy of race and rights. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 272 р.

Yap, A. (2017). Credibility excess and the social imaginary in cases of sexual assault. Feminist Philosophy Quarterly. Vol. 3,no. 4. Available at: https://ojs.lib.uwo.ca/index.php/fpq/article/view/3098 (accessed: 01.02.2022). DOI: https://doi.org/10.5206/fpq/2017.4.1

Received: 22.02.2022. Accepted: 30.04.2022

For citation:

Ignatova N.Yu. [«Kaleidoscope» of feminist epistemologies]. Vestnik Permskogo universiteta. Filosofia. Psihologia. Sociologia[Perm University Herald. Philosophy. Psychology. Sociology], 2022, issue 2, pp. 197–207 (in Russian). DOI: https://doi.org/10.17072/2078-7898/2022-2-197-207