TURNING UP THE LIGHTS ON GASLIGHTING

Abramson's insistence that issues of epistemic reasons, credibility assessments, and testimony play little or no role in gaslighting seems mistaken.

“her insistence that issues of epistemic reasons, credibility assessments, and testimony play little or no role in gaslighting seems mistaken.”

Gaslighter and victim typically stand in a significant relationship of trust or authority, such that the gaslighter can leverage specific interests of his victim to motivate her compliance.

“While Abramson does not stress the point, her analysis makes it clear that gaslighter and victim will typically stand in a signi fi cant relationship of trust or authority, such that the gaslighter is able to leverage speci fi c interests of his victim either in him, in their relationship, or in her social or economic situation that can motivate her compliance.”

Abramson's focus on the gaslighter and on the moral wrongness of his actions leads her to downplay ways in which gaslighters nevertheless deploy genuinely epistemic strategies, and to devote less attention to the standpoint and reasoning processes of the victim.

“I argue that Abramson ' s focus on the gaslighter and on the moral wrongness of his actions leads her to downplay ways in which gaslighters nevertheless deploy genuinely epistemic strategies, and to devote less attention to the standpoint and reasoning processes of the victim”

Abramson's account focuses on the role of manipulation in gaslighting while downplaying epistemic factors such as testimony, evidence, and reasons.

“Abramson ' s account focuses on the role of manipulation in gaslighting while downplaying epistemic factors such as testimony, evidence, and reasons.”