Keyword: ignorance
FiltersNEW

Hold ctrl / ⌘ to select more or unselect / Info

Topics

Languages

Traditions

Times (use negative numbers for BCE)

-

Medium:

Recommended use:

Difficulty:


Full text
El Kassar, Nadja. What Ignorance Really Is. Examining the Foundations of Epistemology of Ignorance
2018, In Social Epistemology, 32(5), pp. 300-310.
Expand entry
Added by: Olivia Maegaard Nielsen
Abstract:

Recent years have seen a surge in publications about the epistemology of ignorance. In this article, I examine the proliferation of the concept ignorance that has come with the increased interest in the topic. I identify three conceptions of ignorance in the current literature: (1) ignorance as lack of knowledge/true belief, (2) ignorance as actively upheld false outlooks and (3) ignorance as substantive epistemic prac- tice. These different conceptions of ignorance are as of yet unacknowledged but are bound to impede epistemology of ignorance and, therefore, need to be uncovered. After discussing three unsuccessful ways of dealing with these varying conceptions, I put forward an integrated conception of ignorance that is more adequate for serving as the foundation of epistemology of ignorance. Introducing an alternative conception of ignorance provides us with a foundation for both epistemological and more broadly philosophical work on ignorance.

Comment: The text provides a great overview over different positions in the epistemologies of ignorance, while also discussing and comparing the different positions. It presupposes some background knowledge on the distinction between the new view and standard view of ignorance, for example. This makes it unsuitable for beginners, but since it is a relatively easy (and short) read that roughly outlines different positions, it would be helpful to add in a seminar/reading group, following a first introduction to the three positions that El Kassar presents: The standard/new view (e.g. Peels), the agential conception of ignorance (Mills/Medina), and the structural conception of ignorance (Alcoff). El Kassar's text would be helpful to contextualize the different positions, since she ends up suggesting a conception that integrates all three. This and other of her texts also engage in an ongoing discussion with Rik Peels that might be interesting to discuss with students.
Full textRead freeSee used
Grasswick, Heidi. Feminist Social Epistemology
2013, Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Expand entry

Added by: Giada Fratantonio
Summary: Survey article on feminist epistemology and its intersection with social epistemology. Includes discussion on topics such as the historical development of feminist epistemology as well as on epistemic injustice and the epistemology of ignorance.
Comment: It can be used as introductory/overview reading for a course on feminism, as well as social epistemology.
Full text
Harman, Elizabeth. Does moral ignorance exculpate?
2011, Ratio 24 (4):443-468.

Expand entry

Added by: Clotilde Torregrossa, Contributed by: Corbin Covington
Abstract: Non-moral ignorance can exculpate: if Anne spoons cyanide into Bill's coffee, but thinks she is spooning sugar, then Anne may be blameless for poisoning Bill. Gideon Rosen argues that moral ignorance can also exculpate: if one does not believe that one's action is wrong, and one has not mismanaged one's beliefs, then one is blameless for acting wrongly. On his view, many apparently blameworthy actions are blameless. I discuss several objections to Rosen. I then propose an alternative view on which many agents who act wrongly are blameworthy despite believing they are acting morally permissibly, and despite not having mismanaged their moral beliefs.1
Comment: This is a stub entry. Please add your comments below to help us expand it
See used
Hoagland, Sarah Lucia. Denying Relationality: Epistemology and Ethics and Ignorance
2007,

Expand entry

Added by: Giada Fratantonio
Summary: In this chapter, the author argues that epistemological and ethical practices of ignorance are strategic and involve a strategic denial of relationality, namely, of the way in which subjects are formed through relation with each other.
Comment: Good as a further reading for a course on epistemology of ignorance.
Full text
Martin Alcoff, Linda. Epistemologies of Ignorance: Three types
2007, in Shannon Sullivan and Nancy Tuana, Race and Epistemologies of Ignorance, Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

Expand entry

Added by: Giada Fratantonio, Nick Novelli
Summary: In this chapter, the author considers three main arguments for the epistemology of ignorance, where this thinks of ignorance not as being a feature of a neglectful epistemic practice, yet as being a substantive epistemic practice itself. The author considers the relationship between these three different arguments that, although differing in the way they present the nature of ignorance, she takes to be jointly compatible. In conclusion, she argues that ignorance is not only a problem related to the justificatory practice, yet also to the ontology of truth.
Comment: Alcoff's essay provides a taxonomy of different types of ignorance, and argues that our current epistemology is not adequate to deal with it. This essay would be good as background reading for an epistemology course focusing on the topic of the epistemology of ignorance, since it provides a good overview and explanation of the problems that need to be resolved. Due to its focus on the social and political causes of ignorance, it could also be used as further reading for social epistemology.
Full text
Mills, Charles W.. White Ignorance
2007, In Suvllian, Shannon & Tuana, Nancy (eds). Race and Epistemologies of Ignorance. State University of New York Press, Albany. 
Expand entry
Added by: Helen Morley, Contributed by: Kei Hiruta
Abstract:

The development of social epistemology in recent decades is a welcome turn away from Cartesian individualism. But the centrality of oppression to societies in general is still insufficiently recognized in this literature. This chapter looks at white ignorance as an example of a particular kind of systemic group-based miscognition that has been hugely influential over the past few hundred years. After a ten-point clarification of the concept, it turns to an examination of white ignorance as it plays itself out in the complex interaction of Eurocentric perception and categorization, white normativity, social memory and social amnesia, the derogation of non-white testimony, racial group interests, and motivated irrationality.

Comment: Argues that "color blindness" contributes to perpetuating racial injustice. Good introductory text to issues of justice in a race context. This text is a classic in epistemologies of ignorance and a lot of succeeding literature on ignorance disccusses this text. It doesn't require massive background knowledge. It would be a valuable addition in classes on the philosophy of race, on standpoint epistemology or in social epistemololgy.
Full text
Sullivan, Shannon (ed.), Tuana, Nancy (ed.). Race and Epistemologies of Ignorance
2007, State Univ of New York Pr.

Expand entry

Added by: Clotilde Torregrossa, Contributed by: Corbin Covington
Publisher's Note: Leading scholars explore how different forms of ignorance are produced and sustained, and the role they play in knowledge practices.
Comment: This is a stub entry. Please add your comments below to help us expand it
Full textRead freeBlue print
Waithe, Mary Ellen. Sex, Lies, and Bigotry: The Canon of Philosophy
2020, In Sigridur Thorgeirsdottir and Ruth Edith Hagengruber (eds.), Methodological Reflections on Women’s Contribution and Influence in the History of Philosophy, Springer International Publishing.

Expand entry

Added by: Rebecca Buxton
Abstract:
In “Sex, Lies, and Bigotry: The Canon of Philosophy” I explore several questions: What does it mean for our understanding of the history of philosophy that women philosophers have been left out and are now being retrieved? What kind of a methodology of the history of philosophy does the recovery of women philosophers imply? Whether and how excluded women philosophers have been included in philosophy? Whether and how feminist philosophy and the history of women philosophers are related? I also explore the questions “Are there any themes or arguments that are common to many women philosophers?” and “Does inclusion of women in the canon require a reconfiguration of philosophical inquiry?” I argue that it is either ineptness or simple bigotry that led most historians of philosophy to intentionally omit women’s contributions from their histories and that such failure replicated itself in the university curricula of recent centuries and can be remedied by suspending for the next two centuries the teaching of men’s contributions to the discipline and teaching works by women only. As an alternative to this drastic and undoubtedly unpopular solution, I propose expanding the length and number of courses in the philosophy curriculum to include discussion of women’s contributions.
Comment (from this Blueprint): In this scathing chapter, Waithe argues that people who have left women out of the history of philosophy are either inempt of bigoted. Rather than being an accidental fact of women's general exclusion, she argues that women philosophers have been ignored intentionally.
Can’t find it?
Contribute the texts you think should be here and we’ll add them soon!