Epistemic Agents Research Articles

When Patient Voices Get Lost in Evidence Hierarchies: A Testimony of Rare Adverse Events and Participatory Epistemic Injustice in Drug Safety Monitoring

ABSTRACT We explore an unsolved challenge in the era of evidence-based medicine (EBM): the recognition of the patient as an epistemic agent or ‘knower’. While patients are increasingly acknowledged as carriers of values and preferences, it seems more challenging to acknowledge them as carriers of important causal information. In contrast, the science of pharmacovigilance depends on patient testimonies as valuable sources of causal evidence. This incompatibility can give rise to cases of what has been called participatory epistemic injustice. We analyse the testimony of a chronic pain patient and co-author of this article, Christine. Christine gives an auto-ethnographic account of her interactions with healthcare professionals trying to find the right pharmacological treatment for her condition. Through the analysis of her own story, she identifies some relevant themes for the epistemic interaction between healthcare professionals and chronic pain patients. We argue that such epistemic interactions are increasingly shaped by EBM and its conception of causality, which devalues patient subjective testimonies and emphasises statistical evidence. We conclude that outlier patients face an inherent risk of being left vulnerable to participatory epistemic injustice, particularly regarding the discovery of novel, rare adverse effects of medicines.

Disrupted self, therapy, and the limits of conversational AI

ABSTRACT Conversational agents (CA) are thought to be promising for psychotherapy because they give the impression of being able to engage in conversations with human users. However, given the high risk for therapy patients who are already in a vulnerable situation, there is a need to investigate the extent to which CA are able to contribute to therapy goals and to discuss CA’s limitations, especially in complex cases. In this paper, we understand psychotherapy as a way of dealing with existential situations and position CAs in the context of the therapeutic experience of patients. This experience is determined by the patient’s unique personal context and specific therapy goals. We suggest that psychotherapy is a fundamentally dialogical activity, because it crucially involves work on the self and one’s self-narrative. This brings us to our central question: is it possible for CAs to engage in a productive therapeutic dialogue, given their limitations as epistemic agents? We will discuss several of those limitations, show how these undermine the possibility of engaging in a therapeutic dialogue, and illustrate those limitations through discussions of the cases of grief and abuse.

Breaking boundaries: children activist as epistemic agents within contours of epistemic marginalisation

The article delves into the realm of child environmental activism, portraying it as a concerted response aimed at challenging the prevailing social and political status quo, which systematically underestimates the role of children in decision-making within political and social spheres. It highlights the paramount importance of the epistemological framework that encompasses children's experiences, emphasising how their exclusion from political and social discourse leads to epistemic marginalisation. This exclusion not only prevents children from assuming the role of epistemic agents but also deprives them of agency and perpetuates existing inequalities. From a philosophical perspective, the article proposes a thorough analysis of children's epistemic agency, introducing the concept of 'epistemic capability'. It argues that, despite their social marginalisation, knowledgeable children can equip themselves with epistemic resources to interpret their reality and effect change. Furthermore, it posits that environmental activism plays a crucial role as an epistemic resource for children, facilitating the expression of their ideas, challenging dominant narratives, and addressing environmental and social issues head-on. The article emphasises the transformative potential of activism as an epistemic resource, enabling substantive participation and empowering children to navigate and transcend such marginalised circumstances. In conclusion, it highlights how child environmental activism not only challenges the status quo but also provides children with crucial tools for their development as epistemic and social agents, promoting significant change in power dynamics and in the fight for social and environmental justice.

Epistemic logic with partial grasp

We have to gain from recognizing a relation between epistemic agents and the parts of subject matters that play a role in their cognitive lives. I call this relation “grasping”. Namely, I zone in on one notion of having a partial grasp of a subject matter—that of agents grasping part of the subject matter that they are attending to—and characterize it. I propose that giving up the idealization that we fully grasp the subject matters we attend to allows one to more realistically characterize the epistemic life of agents. To show this, I propose an epistemic logic with partial grasp that has in mind considerations from first-order aboutness theory with the aim of avoiding certain forms of logical omniscience, and which provides an alternative to immanent closure (Yablo Aboutness, Princeton University Press, 2014).

Learning designs that empower: navigating sandbox data science at the intersection of computing, big data and social media

PurposeThere is a need for precollege learning designs that empower youth to be epistemic agents in contexts that intersect burgeoning areas of computing, big data and social media. The purpose of this study is to explore how “sandbox” or open-inquiry data science with social media supports learning.Design/methodology/approachThis paper offers vignettes from an illustrative youth study case that highlights the pedagogical prospects and obstacles tied to designing for open-ended inquiry with computational data science to access or “scrape” Twitter/X. The youth case showcases how social media can be taken up productively and in ways that facilitate epistemological agency, an approach where individuals actively shape understanding and knowledge-creation processes, highlighting the potentially transformative impact this approach might have in empowering learners to engage productively.FindingsThe authors identify three key affordances for learning that emerged from the illustrative case: (1) flexible opportunities for content-specific domain mastery, (2) situated inquiry that embodies next-generation science practices and (3) embedded computational skill development. The authors discuss these findings in relation to contemporary education needs to broaden participation in data science and computing.Originality/valueTo address challenges in current data science education associated with supporting sustained and productive engagement in computing-based data science, the authors leverage a “sandbox” approach – an original pedagogical framework to support open inquiry with precollege groups. The authors demonstrate how “big data” drawn from social media with high school-aged youth supports learning designs and outcomes by emphasizing learner interests and authentic practice.

The weight of truth

Belief is said to be subject to a norm of truth. A norm, intuitively, tells us what we ought to or may do. What sort of claim can truth make on us? On one standard view, the truth norm of belief is obliging. One ought to believe the truth and truth only. On another view, the truth norm of belief is permissive. One may believe the truth and truth only. Recently, it has been argued that the truth norm plays no interesting role in our normative theorizing for it issues excessive, unsatisfiable claims. This paper defends the truth norm of belief and proposes a novel answer to the question concerning its normative force on a reason-based framework. I argue that the normative force of the truth norm depends on the weight of truth as a normative reason for belief, which, just like that of any other normative reason, may vary across different contexts. I develop the idea that the weight of truth as a reason for belief is conditioned by what an epistemic agent can or cannot believe and modified by epistemic risk, among other things.

More than just principles: revisiting epistemic systems

Epistemic relativism rests on the existence of a plurality of epistemic systems. There is, however, no consensus on what epistemic systems actually are. Critics argue that epistemic relativism fails because its proponents cannot convincingly show the possibility of two mutually exclusive epistemic systems. Their accounts of epistemic systems are, however, highly idealized, conceptualizing them as sets of epistemic principles exclusively. But epistemic systems are necessarily inhabited by epistemic agents who negotiate these principles. Focusing on epistemic principles exclusively thus might abstract away too much from the actual dynamics within epistemic systems. Drawing from the sociology of scientific knowledge and the distinction between sociolect and idiolect in the philosophy of language, I aim to provide a richer account of epistemic systems and show that current arguments against epistemic relativism fail because they rest on an unrealistic conceptualization of epistemic systems.

Should we worry about conspiracy theorists rejecting experts?

ABSTRACT Concerns have been raised by both researchers and authorities regarding conspiracy theorists rejecting experts. To address the validity of these concerns, we need to delve into two key inquiries regarding who qualifies as an expert on conspiracy theories, and what constitutes an epistemically rational response (from a conspiracy theorist) when faced with expert testimony. The first inquiry presents a challenge when considering a reputationalist versus a realist account of experts. On the reputationalist account rejecting experts may be viewed as little more than rejecting those whom society has collectively deemed as experts. Alternatively, adopting a realist account raises the challenge of determining who the genuine experts are. I argue that the realist account is the more compelling option for pursuing the first question. Moreover, I explore two prevalent accounts from existing literature that prescribe how epistemic agents should respond to expert testimony: the Preemptive View and the Community View. Through an examination using the simulation program Laputa, I demonstrate that both accounts are insufficient. Consequently, I argue that without a clear identification of experts in the broader context of conspiracy theories, the initial concern lacks a solid foundation, and the sense of urgency may be unwarranted.

Mandevillian vices

Bernard Mandeville argued that traits that have traditionally been seen as detrimental or reprehensible, such as greed, ambition, vanity, and the willingness to deceive, can produce significant social goods. He went so far as to suggest that a society composed of individuals who embody these vices would, under certain constraints, be better off than one composed only of those who embody the virtues of self-restraint. In the twentieth century, Mandeville’s insights were taken up in economics by John Maynard Keynes, among others. More recently, philosophers have drawn analogies to Mandeville’s ideas in the domains of epistemology and morality, arguing that traits that are typically understood as epistemic or moral vices (e.g. closed-mindedness, vindictiveness) can lead to beneficial outcomes for the groups in which individuals cooperate, deliberate, and decide, for instance by propitiously dividing the cognitive labor involved in critical inquiry and introducing transient diversity. We argue that mandevillian virtues have a negative counterpart, mandevillian vices, which are traits that are beneficial to or admirable in their individual possessor, but are or can be systematically detrimental to the group to which that individual belongs. Whilst virtue ethics and epistemology prescribe character traits that are good for every moral and epistemic agent, and ideally across all situations, mandevillian virtues show that group dynamics can complicate this picture. In this paper, we provide a unifying explanation of the main mechanism responsible for mandevillian traits in general and motivate the case for the opposite of mandevillian virtues, namely mandevillian vices.

Experts or Authorities? The Strange Case of the Presumed Epistemic Superiority of Artificial Intelligence Systems

The high predictive accuracy of contemporary machine learning-based AI systems has led some scholars to argue that, in certain cases, we should grant them epistemic expertise and authority over humans. This approach suggests that humans would have the epistemic obligation of relying on the predictions of a highly accurate AI system. Contrary to this view, in this work we claim that it is not possible to endow AI systems with a genuine account of epistemic expertise. In fact, relying on accounts of expertise and authority from virtue epistemology, we show that epistemic expertise requires a relation with understanding that AI systems do not satisfy and intellectual abilities that these systems do not manifest. Further, following the Distribution Cognition theory and adapting an account by Croce on the virtues of collective epistemic agents to the case of human-AI interactions we show that, if an AI system is successfully appropriated by a human agent, a hybrid epistemic agent emerges, which can become both an epistemic expert and an authority. Consequently, we claim that the aforementioned hybrid agent is the appropriate object of a discourse around trust in AI and the epistemic obligations that stem from its epistemic superiority.

Epistemic Domination and ‘Gender Identity Fraud’ Prosecutions

ABSTRACT By analyzing the so-called ‘gender identity fraud’ cases of recent years in Great Britain, I will show that these cases fall outside Miranda Fricker’s theoretical framework of epistemic injustice. In building on Talia Bettcher’s work on the deceiver and pretender stereotypes of trans people, I will provide an analysis of the convictions and argue that these cases are examples of epistemic domination. First, I will argue that testimonial injustice as a concept is inapt to explain why the consent given in these cases was considered vitiated in the trials. Second, I will show how hermeneutical injustice falls short in elucidating the power structures at play and obscures our understanding of the possibilities and responsibilities of the respective epistemic agents. Moreover, I argue that these cases are morally and politically wrong because these convictions create a legal double-bind for trans people. At the end of my discussion, I develop the concept of relational epistemic domination, which is suffered by partners of trans people and which might affect the complainants in these cases. I will conclude that states must refrain from prosecuting gender identity fraud, and to theorize similar cases adequately, we must do so as cases of epistemic domination.

Adapting scientific modeling practice for promoting elementary students’ productive disciplinary engagement

ABSTRACT This study explores the adaptations made by elementary school teachers to promote student Productive Disciplinary Engagement (PDE) during modeling activities within an online learning context. PDE means students make collective intellectual progress by using disciplinary practices and ideas to formulate possible solutions or answers. Given the abrupt transition to remote education instigated by the COVID-19 pandemic, student engagement and hands-on learning opportunities have faced significant challenges. This study adopts a collective case study design with an interpretivist perspective, investigating three fourth-grade teachers over the 2020–2021 school year. We collected multiple data sources, including professional learnings, observations, teacher interviews, and student artifacts. The study identified four significant themes pertaining to teacher adaptations that corresponded with increased students’ PDE: leverage technology tools for constructing models; maximise student-centered choice and position students as epistemic agents in modeling; incorporate family and community resources for modeling; and utilise students’ diverse knowledge and expertise in modeling. These findings contribute to our understanding of effective strategies for promoting student engagement and the practical application of scientific modeling in online learning environments.

On the Intellectual Vice of Epistemic Apathy

ABSTRACT Our aim in this paper is to characterize epistemic apathy as an intellectual vice. The agent who possesses this character trait is led not to intervene to prevent another epistemic agent from forming a false belief when it would be appropriate to intervene. Following the motivational viewpoint on vice, we conclude that epistemic apathy can be cashed out in terms of imperfect epistemic motivations. The apathetic agent possesses bad (or, at least, lacks good) epistemic motives. We show, however, that motivationalism has difficulties accounting for the excess-vice: epistemic paternalism. Following the obstructivism understanding of intellectual vice, we highlight the fact that epistemic apathy does not get in the way of knowledge for the agent who possesses this trait. This goes against our intuition that epistemic apathy is an intellectual vice. To remedy this, we argue that epistemic vices do not necessarily harm the vicious agent.

Defining the method of reflective equilibrium

The method of reflective equilibrium (MRE) is a method of justification popularized by John Rawls and further developed by Norman Daniels, Michael DePaul, Folke Tersman, and Catherine Z. Elgin, among others. The basic idea is that epistemic agents have justified beliefs if they have succeeded in forming their beliefs into a harmonious system of beliefs which they reflectively judge to be the most plausible. Despite the common reference to MRE as a method, its mechanisms or rules are typically expressed in a metaphorical or simplified manner and are therefore criticized as too vague. Recent efforts to counter this criticism have been directed towards the attempt to provide formal explications of MRE. This paper aims to supplement these efforts by providing an informal working definition of MRE. This approach challenges the view that MRE can adequately be characterized only in the negative as a set of anti-essentialisms. I argue that epistemic agents follow MRE iff they follow four interconnected rules, which are concerned with a minimalistic form of foundationalism, a minimalistic form of fallibilism, a moderate form of holism, and a minimalistic form of rationality. In the critical spirit of MRE, the corresponding working definition is, of course, provisional and revisable. In general, the aim is to contribute to a reflective equilibrium (RE) concerning MRE. If it is successful, this working definition provides a better grasp of the most basic elements of the method and thereby enhances our understanding of it.

Manufacturing the Illusion of Epistemic Trustworthiness

Abstract There are epistemic manipulators in the world. These people are actively attempting to sacrifice epistemic goods for personal gain. In doing so, manipulators have led many competent epistemic agents into believing contrarian theories that go against well-established knowledge. In this paper, I explore one mechanism by which manipulators get epistemic agents to believe contrarian theories. I do so by looking at a prominent empirical model of trustworthiness. This model identifies three major factors that epistemic agents look for when trying to determine who is trustworthy. These are (i) ability, (ii) benevolence, and (iii) moral integrity. I then show how manipulators can manufacture the illusion that they possess these factors. This leads epistemic agents to view manipulators as trustworthy sources of information. Additionally, I argue that fact-checking will be an ineffective – or even harmful – practice when correcting the beliefs of epistemic agents who have been tricked by this illusion of epistemic trustworthiness. I suggest that in such cases we should use an alternative correction, which I call trust undercutting.

Concepts and Contexts: Towards a Theory of “Hermeneutical Bastardization”

Abstract This paper theorizes and defends a process I term “hermeneutical bastardization.” This concept tracks the way in which some hermeneutical injustices arise not from a gap in a shared pool of hermeneutical resources, but from the decontextualization of an advantageous hermeneutical resource into another (typically dominant) hermeneutical domain. This decontextualization bastardizes hermeneutical resources by severing the concept from its original meaning and significance. I focus on the term “trans woman” and examine the way in which dominant epistemic agents rewrite and redefine the concept according to prominent and prevalent pernicious representations. Specifically, once decontextualized, the term “trans woman” denotes an individual who is thoroughly erotic and sexual in nature. Hermeneutical bastardization can illuminate how hermeneutically marginalized groups are reconstructed by other dominant epistemic agents according to these pernicious representations and can be silenced whilst their concepts, or rather their terms, are being utilized in sets of dominant hermeneutical resources in ways that severely diverge from their original intra-communal conceptualization. This type of hermeneutical injustice does not arise from a lacuna in our set of resources, but instead depends on the uptake of a concept's term and its subsequent decontextualization.

Conceptual Injustice

In recent years, there has been significant interest in injustices that do not consist in inflicting physical or material harm on others, but operate in more subtle ways, e.g. by targeting our status as epistemic agents. In a similar fashion, this paper aims to bring to the forefront a currently overlooked kind of injustice that occurs in relation to our concepts: conceptual injustice, which is characterised by wrongful in- or exclusion from the application of a concept. The first part of the paper is concerned with spelling out the notion, discussing its characteristic wrongs, and with tracing it in a number of examples. In the second part, I discuss conceptual injustice in relation to connected but different forms of injustice, such as epistemic injustice. This highlights the advantages of having the notion on hand: it enhances our understanding of other forms of injustice like hermeneutical injustice, and allows us to capture a ‘remainder of injustice’ for which we could not account otherwise.

Detecting your depression with your smartphone? – An ethical analysis of epistemic injustice in passive self-tracking apps

Smartphone apps might offer a low-threshold approach to the detection of mental health conditions, such as depression. Based on the gathering of ‘passive data,’ some apps generate a user’s ‘digital phenotype,’ compare it to those of users with clinically confirmed depression and issue a warning if a depressive episode is likely. These apps can, thus, serve as epistemic tools for affected users. From an ethical perspective, it is crucial to consider epistemic injustice to promote socially responsible innovations within digital mental healthcare. In cases of epistemic injustice, people are wronged specifically as epistemic agents, i.e., agents of the production and distribution of knowledge. We suggest that epistemic agency relies on different resource- and uptake-related preconditions which can be impacted by the functionality of passive self-tracking apps. We consider how this can lead to different forms of epistemic injustice (testimonial, hermeneutical, and contributory injustice) and analyze the influence of the apps’ use on epistemic practices on an individual level, in mental healthcare settings, and on the structural level.

From active learners to knowledge contributors: authentic assessment as a catalyst for students' epistemic agency

ABSTRACT This study examines how authentic assessment could nurture students’ epistemic agency: their sense of agency in using, evaluating and producing knowledge. Authentic assessment commonly emphasises ‘realism’ and ‘employability skills’. As important as these ideas are, this approach to authentic assessment neglects the key academic value of knowledge, a gap we address by adding epistemology into the conversation. Our qualitative case study explores an archaeology course whose authentic assessment design relied heavily on digital technologies. We empirically analyse students’ sense of epistemic agency after articulating the affordances of the course’s authentic assessment design. Our findings show that digitally-mediated authentic assessment promoted students’ relationship with knowledge in three ways. Students understood themselves as (i) active learners, (ii) active users of knowledge and (iii) epistemic agents who contributed to public archaeological knowledge. We reframe authentic assessment as a catalyst for students’ epistemic agency, enabling students to contribute to social good.

Can Epistemic Paternalistic Practice Make Us Better Epistemic Agents?

AbstractCan epistemic paternalistic practices make us better epistemic agents? While a satisfying answer to this question will ultimately rest at least partly on empirical findings, considering the epistemological discussion on evidence, knowledge, and epistemic virtues can be insightful. In this paper, Giada Fratantonio argues that we have theoretical reasons to believe that strong epistemic paternalistic practices may be effective at mitigating some evidential mistakes, in fostering true belief, and even for allowing the subject of the intervention to gain knowledge. However, we have reasons to expect that these practices will not be able to make the subject of the intervention an overall better epistemic agent at the dispositional level. She then considers weak epistemic paternalistic practices, e.g., epistemic nudging, and provides some reasons for optimism. Finally, Fratantonio considers the implications that these theoretical considerations have for education.