Epistemic oppression, intersectionality and the epistemology of ignorance in a multicultural, multiple-identity society

在社交媒体时代和多元文化社会中，具有多方面身份的各种行为者有越来越多的机会在认识上相互接触，诸如破坏、沉默、语言管制、煤气灯和认识压迫等认识错误越来越频繁地发生。许多研究致力于种族主义或性别歧视的主体如何在认识上压制边缘化群体，但很少关注那些声称反种族主义和反性别歧视的主体，或者简而言之，那些悬挂进步旗帜的人所犯下的认识上的压迫。本研究建议的重点是调查这种情况下的认知压迫。我将尝试探讨这个问题，“善意的社会政治主体如何在认识上排斥甚至压迫边缘化群体？“社会政治主体，我指的是活动家，社交媒体影响者，政治家或只是普通人谁试图促进进步的价值观，但谁往往是无知的认识特权。所以，另一个相关的问题是，“知识特权的主体如何进行知识压迫？或者，更准确地说，一个有特权的进步主体，其既定目的是反对一切形式的不公正，如何在不知不觉中对边缘化群体施加认识上的压迫？这种压迫的认知和非认知机制是什么？我将用一个我称之为“好的活动家”的运动的案例来调查进步运动如何在认识上压迫具有不同身份或来自较低特权背景的边缘化人群。认识压迫的概念本身很有趣，但我关心的是调查那些乍一看并不明显算作认识不公正或沉默的案例。围绕认识上的不公正和压迫的讨论主要涉及压迫性社会中压迫性主体所犯下的不公正和歧视。在这个项目中，我想表明，在民主社会中，进步的主体可能会犯下认知压迫。我的研究建议是研究，使用概念工具，如无知的认识论，修辞空间，立场认识论，和交叉性，由善意的主体所犯下的认知压迫的情况。然而，我的研究将超越描述性的层面：我将试图通过使用认识责任的概念，更具体地说，认识抵抗，为这种认识压迫提出一种补救措施。所以，另一个有趣的问题是，“谁应该被认为是认识上负责任的主体？是具有更多认识能力的特权主体，还是其认识抵抗产生于其独特认识立场的弱势主体？我相信，这个项目不仅是相关的，但关键的，在当前的社会政治气候中，社区在认识上是分裂的，边缘化群体很容易受到认识上的压迫，即使是善意的进步社会政治参与者参与人权，社会媒体和社会运动。

In the age of social media and in multicultural societies where various actors with multiple aspects of identities have expanding opportunities to engage epistemically with each other, epistemic wrongs such as undermining, silencing, language policing, gaslighting and epistemic oppression occur with increasing frequency. Much research has been devoted to how racist or sexist subjects epistemically suppress marginalised groups, but little attention has been given to epistemic oppression committed by those subjects who claim to be anti-racist and anti-sexist or, in short, those who fly the flag for progression. The focus of this research proposal is the investigation of such cases of epistemic oppression. I will try to explore the question, 'How do well-intentioned socio-political subjects epistemically exclude or even oppress marginalised groups?' By socio-political subjects, I mean activists, social media influencers, politicians or just ordinary people who try to promote progressive values, but who are often ignorant of their epistemic privileges. So, the other relevant question is, 'How do epistemically privileged subjects commit epistemic oppression?' or, to be more precise, 'How does a privileged progressive subject whose stated purpose is to fight against all forms of injustice, unknowingly impose epistemic oppression on marginalised groups? What are the epistemic and non-epistemic mechanisms of such oppression?'I will use the case of a movement that I will call 'the good activists' to investigate how progressive movements epistemically oppress marginalised people with different identities or from less privileged backgrounds. The idea of epistemic oppression is interesting in itself, but my concern is to investigate those cases which at first sight do not clearly count as instances of epistemic injustice or silencing. The discussions surrounding epistemic injustice and oppression mostly address the injustice and discrimination perpetrated by oppressive subjects in oppressive societies. In this project, I want to show that epistemic oppression may be committed by progressive subjects in a democratic society. My research proposal is to study, using conceptual tools such as the epistemology of ignorance, rhetorical spaces, standpoint epistemology, and intersectionality, cases of epistemic oppression committed by well-intentioned subjects. However, my research will go beyond the descriptive level: I will try to propose a remedy for such epistemic oppression by using the concept of epistemic responsibility, and more specifically epistemic resistance. So, another interesting question is, 'Who should be considered an epistemically responsible subject?' Is it the privileged subject with more epistemic capacity or the underprivileged subject whose epistemic resistance arises from their unique epistemic standpoint? I believe that this project is not only relevant, but critical, in the current socio-political climate, in which communities are epistemically divided, and marginalised groups are vulnerable to epistemic oppression even by well-intentioned progressive socio-political actors involved in human rights, social media and social movements.