Short Abstract:

How can STS function as liberatory praxis in epistemic struggles, and can we balance a concern for epistemic justice with our discipline’s own concern for scientific credibility and authority?

Long Abstract:

Social theorists of knowledge have convincingly demonstrated that power shapes and is shaped by knowledge produced about the world. In this context, policymakers, regulatory agencies, civil society, and the courts rely on sanctioned knowledge to clarify socio-political problems and derive legitimate authority. Yet this demand also marginalizes the lived experience and intimate institutional knowledge of the people and publics most impacted, which feminist philosophers and critical theorists have recognized as a form of “epistemic violence” (Spivak 1988) or “epistemic injustice” (Fricker 2007). For instance, as the randomized controlled trial becomes the ‘gold standard’ for evidence-based policymaking, how can the experiences of structurally marginalized actors be considered ‘credible’ knowledge? This panel welcomes papers exploring “epistemic justice” as a framework for transformative interventions in public policy or institutional programming. We envision works addressing questions such as: How do arguably ‘subordinate’ groups make credible claims in interactions with ‘evidence-based’ government programs, civil society organizations, or development agencies? How are institutional actors empowered to determine criteria for credibility concerning policy successes and failures, and what are the consequences of these decisions? We especially invite perspectives on the role of sociology in empirically demonstrating the mechanisms by which ‘subordinate’ groups are afforded or denied credibility and by which epistemic justice can be achieved or thwarted. To what extent can sociology function as liberatory praxis in epistemic struggles, and how can we as sociologists balance a concern for epistemic justice with our discipline’s own concern for scientific credibility and authority?