Miranda Fricker

When someone speaks but is not heard because of their accent, or their sex, or the color of their skin, they suffer a distinctive form of injustice—they are undermined as a knower. This kind of injustice, which I call testimonial injustice, is not only an ethical problem but also a political one, for citizens are not free unless they get a fair hearing when they try to contest wrongful treatment. I shall argue that not only individuals but also public _institutions_ need to have the virtue of testimonial justice. If our police, our juries, our complaints panels lack that virtue, then some groups cannot contest. And if you can’t do that, you do not have political freedom.

The overarching purpose of this chapter is to illustrate the philosophical fruitfulness of expanding epistemology not only laterally across the social space of other epistemic subjects, but at the same time vertically in the temporal dimension. This chapter sets about this by first presenting central strands of Michael Williams's diagnostic engagement with skepticism, in which he crucially employs a Default and Challenge model of justification. The chapter then develops three key aspects of Edward Craig's “practical explication” of the concept of knowledge so that they may be seen to resonate positively with Williams's epistemological picture: the admixture of internalist and externalist features; the proto-contextualism; and, finally, the distinctively genealogical anti-skeptical impetus. In this way the chapter supports and augments the socialized anti-skeptical case mounted by Williams, and so shows that expanding epistemology in the temporal dimension can be a productive move in central debates in epistemology.