CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 272Feminist Epistemology and Gender StudiesHermeneutics and Narrative IdentityEpistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics

Two Kinds of Unknowing

Mason, Rebecca·2011·Hypatia
DOI 10.1111/j.1527-2001.2011.01175.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Miranda Fricker claims that a “gap” in collective hermeneutical resources with respect to the social experiences of marginalized groups prevents members of those groups from understanding their own experiences (Fricker 2007). I argue that because Fricker misdescribes dominant hermeneutical resources as collective, she fails to locate the ethically bad epistemic practices that maintain gaps in dominant hermeneutical resources even while alternative interpretations are in fact offered by non-dominant discourses. Fricker's analysis of hermeneutical injustice does not account for the possibility that marginalized groups can be silenced relative to dominant discourses without being prevented from understanding or expressing their own social experiences. I suggest that a gap in dominant hermeneutical resources is ambiguous between two kinds of unknowing: hermeneutical injustice suffered by members of marginalized groups, and epistemically and ethically blameworthy ignorance perpetrated by members of dominant groups.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1527-2001.2011.01175.x

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Oppression does not necessarily stifle a community's capacity for making sense of their particular social experiences; marginalized groups are not doomed to perceive their experiences of oppression 'through a glass darkly'.

    “However, as is well documented, oppression does not necessarily stifle a community's capacity for making sense of their particular social experiences; marginalized groups are not doomed to perceive their experiences of oppression 'through a glass darkly'.”

    From Agency and authority: A differentiated model of hermeneutical power (2025) · cites this paper as Mason 2011

  • Marginalized groups often develop novel concepts and terms for articulating aspects of social life that dominant frameworks are ill-equipped to map.

    “Indeed, as others in the hermeneutical injustice literature are quick to point out, they often develop novel concepts and terms for articulating aspects of social life that dominant frameworks are ill-equipped to map (Mason 2011 ;Dotson 2012 ;Medina 2012Medina , 2013 ) ).”

    From Agency and authority: A differentiated model of hermeneutical power (2025) · cites this paper as Mason 2011

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 13 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Mason, R.
Corresponding author
Mason, Rebecca
ORCID
Mason, Rebecca
Venue
Hypatia
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Published
2011
Volume
26
Issue
2
Pages
294-307
ISSN
  • 0887-5367 (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-2001
DOI
10.1111/j.1527-2001.2011.01175.x
OpenAlex
W2129213993
Cited by
265
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 58 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 35 · 2023: 21 · 2022: 38 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 5
FWCI
11.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
www.cambridge.org/core/terms (unspecified, 3357 d)
Locations
Hypatia (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Hermeneutics and Narrative Identity
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Philosophy › Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics
Keywords
hermeneutical injustice, Miranda Fricker, marginalized communities, ignorance, epistemic injustice, epistemic ignorance, social experience, epistemic practices

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review