Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Epistemic Injustice and the Attention Economy

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Epistemic Injustice and the Attention Economy

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Epistemic Injustice and the Attention Economy. / Smith, Leonie; Archer, Alfred.
In: Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, Vol. 23, No. 5, 05.11.2020, p. 777.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

Smith, L & Archer, A 2020, 'Epistemic Injustice and the Attention Economy', Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, vol. 23, no. 5, pp. 777. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-020-10123-x

APA

Smith, L., & Archer, A. (2020). Epistemic Injustice and the Attention Economy. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice, 23(5), 777. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-020-10123-x

Vancouver

Smith L, Archer A. Epistemic Injustice and the Attention Economy. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice. 2020 Nov 5;23(5):777. doi: 10.1007/s10677-020-10123-x

Author

Smith, Leonie ; Archer, Alfred. / Epistemic Injustice and the Attention Economy. In: Ethical Theory and Moral Practice. 2020 ; Vol. 23, No. 5. pp. 777.

Bibtex

@article{d9fd699d23914d77b8b5bdbb541c4f06,
title = "Epistemic Injustice and the Attention Economy",
abstract = "In recent years, a significant body of literature has emerged on the subject of epistemic injustice: wrongful harms done to people in their capacities as knowers (Fricker 2007). Up to now this literature has ignored the role that attention has to play in epistemic injustice. This paper makes a first step towards addressing this gap. We argue that giving someone less attention than they are due, which we call an epistemic attention deficit, is a distinct form of epistemic injustice. We begin by outlining what we mean by epistemic attention deficits, which we understand as a failure to pay someone the attention they are due in their role as an epistemic agent. We argue that these deficits constitute epistemic injustices for two reasons. First, they affect someone{\textquoteright}s ability to influence what others believe. Second, they affect one{\textquoteright}s ability to influence the shared common ground in which testimonial exchanges take place. We then outline the various ways in which epistemic attention deficits harm those who are subject to them. We argue that epistemic attention deficits are harms in and of themselves because they deprive people of an essential component of epistemic agency. Moreover, epistemic attention deficits reduce an agent{\textquoteright}s ability to participate in valuable epistemic practices. These two forms of harm have important impacts on educational performance and the distribution of resources. Finally, we argue that epistemic attention deficits both hinder and shape the development of epistemic agency. We finish by exploring some practical implications arising from our discussion.",
keywords = "Attention economy, Education, Epistemic agency, Epistemic attention, Working class, Epistemic injustice",
author = "Leonie Smith and Alfred Archer",
year = "2020",
month = nov,
day = "5",
doi = "10.1007/s10677-020-10123-x",
language = "English",
volume = "23",
pages = "777",
journal = "Ethical Theory and Moral Practice",
issn = "1386-2820",
publisher = "Springer Netherlands",
number = "5",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Epistemic Injustice and the Attention Economy

AU - Smith, Leonie

AU - Archer, Alfred

PY - 2020/11/5

Y1 - 2020/11/5

N2 - In recent years, a significant body of literature has emerged on the subject of epistemic injustice: wrongful harms done to people in their capacities as knowers (Fricker 2007). Up to now this literature has ignored the role that attention has to play in epistemic injustice. This paper makes a first step towards addressing this gap. We argue that giving someone less attention than they are due, which we call an epistemic attention deficit, is a distinct form of epistemic injustice. We begin by outlining what we mean by epistemic attention deficits, which we understand as a failure to pay someone the attention they are due in their role as an epistemic agent. We argue that these deficits constitute epistemic injustices for two reasons. First, they affect someone’s ability to influence what others believe. Second, they affect one’s ability to influence the shared common ground in which testimonial exchanges take place. We then outline the various ways in which epistemic attention deficits harm those who are subject to them. We argue that epistemic attention deficits are harms in and of themselves because they deprive people of an essential component of epistemic agency. Moreover, epistemic attention deficits reduce an agent’s ability to participate in valuable epistemic practices. These two forms of harm have important impacts on educational performance and the distribution of resources. Finally, we argue that epistemic attention deficits both hinder and shape the development of epistemic agency. We finish by exploring some practical implications arising from our discussion.

AB - In recent years, a significant body of literature has emerged on the subject of epistemic injustice: wrongful harms done to people in their capacities as knowers (Fricker 2007). Up to now this literature has ignored the role that attention has to play in epistemic injustice. This paper makes a first step towards addressing this gap. We argue that giving someone less attention than they are due, which we call an epistemic attention deficit, is a distinct form of epistemic injustice. We begin by outlining what we mean by epistemic attention deficits, which we understand as a failure to pay someone the attention they are due in their role as an epistemic agent. We argue that these deficits constitute epistemic injustices for two reasons. First, they affect someone’s ability to influence what others believe. Second, they affect one’s ability to influence the shared common ground in which testimonial exchanges take place. We then outline the various ways in which epistemic attention deficits harm those who are subject to them. We argue that epistemic attention deficits are harms in and of themselves because they deprive people of an essential component of epistemic agency. Moreover, epistemic attention deficits reduce an agent’s ability to participate in valuable epistemic practices. These two forms of harm have important impacts on educational performance and the distribution of resources. Finally, we argue that epistemic attention deficits both hinder and shape the development of epistemic agency. We finish by exploring some practical implications arising from our discussion.

KW - Attention economy

KW - Education

KW - Epistemic agency

KW - Epistemic attention

KW - Working class

KW - Epistemic injustice

U2 - 10.1007/s10677-020-10123-x

DO - 10.1007/s10677-020-10123-x

M3 - Journal article

VL - 23

SP - 777

JO - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice

JF - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice

SN - 1386-2820

IS - 5

ER -