Knowledge and Perspectives: Lessons From Standpoint Epistemology
Source: https://www.skuola.net/scuola/alzata-mano-vietata-inghilterra.html
Standpoint Theories (Briefly) Explained
Standpoint epistemologists’ most important endeavour is questioning impartial objectivity and proposing the appreciation of perspectival inquiry. Briana Toole, for example, writes that “what one is in a position to know depends on facts about that person’s social identity” (Toole 2021, 340) and that our social identities “shape the resources we are in possession of” to make sense of the world (Toole 2021, 341). Net of philosophical vocabulary, this means that our constant search for abstract points of view that can be objectively justified may be flawed. In fact, every person is inevitably embedded in a social world and therefore in a framework of advantages and disadvantages, privilege and discrimination.
The experiences we have as social beings influence our sensitivity to specific aspects of the world—its injustices and power dynamics —but also shape the conceptual resources necessary to make sense of them. Now, some simple facts, that the author of this piece is in Italy at the time of writing for instance, can be fully known by everyone. But when it comes to facts about the social domain, one’s experiences can and often do matter. For example, past victims of racism are plausibly more inclined to notice all the different forms of racist discrimination and have more refined ways to explain them.
Some authors, like Alison Wylie (2003), go even further and argue that disadvantaged groups have privileged access to reality. In a world of unbalanced power relations, there are countless elements that minorities need to notice and be careful of to navigate life. This grants them a higher capacity to understand their position and certain aspects of the social world. For example, as Toole (2022, 58-9) notes, having to often fight sexism and the risk of sexual harassment, women are better equipped to detect them. As a consequence, one may say, they gain better knowledge of sexism and gender-based violence.
Such a claim may sound radical , but cannot be easily dismissed as extreme. Consider the case of the so-called “colourism” (Toole 2019, 605) — the discriminatory tendency to prefer, among non-white people, those who look “more white” (Toole 2019, 605). Many of those who have never been discriminated against because of the colour of their skin have likely never noticed this bias. And yet, knowledge about colourism stems from several people experiencing it, recognising its specificity, and finding a label for it. For those who live and name colourism, it is real, and knowledge about it is true. As soon as we learn about colourism—what it is and implies—objecting to its existence or to the authenticity of it being experienced by some becomes immediately difficult. Moreover, an analysis of racism that includes colourism now seems more exhaustive, more true than one without it. This is because we have recognised the value of a different standpoint that makes us appreciate a new aspect of reality.
Another remark is essential. Within standpoint theories, merely occupying a particular social position is not sufficient for acquiring better knowledge. To gain insight into socially salient facts, one must undergo a process of “consciousness-raising”—a reflective effort that leads to the development of a standpoint from which those facts can be identified, interpreted, and understood (Toole 2021, 341). In other words, being a migrant does not automatically mean that I understand the migrant experience more deeply than someone who is not; I also need some conceptual resources to see what is salient in my condition and to make sense of it in rational terms. Direct and shared experience can support this process: sharing my experience as a migrant with those in the same condition makes it easier for us to develop a collective vocabulary and a deeper self-understanding. However, at the same time, it is possible for the locals to understand the migrant condition through encounter and genuine reflection. Indeed, individuals can engage meaningfully with others’ experiences, adopting their interpretive frameworks and gaining real knowledge even about the most distant ones.
What Standpoint Epistemology Can Teach Us About Truth and Deliberation
What does standpoint epistemology suggest about how to make sense of the social world together? One core lesson from our discussion is that truth may not be reached through abstraction from social experience, but rather by listening to the situated voices shaped by it. People seem to often equate knowledge and accuracy with detachment and neutrality. But standpoint authors help us see the limitations of this model. Many of the most urgent and complex social facts are not best revealed by stepping away from the world, but by being deeply embedded in it. Accordingly, analyses of complex social phenomena are more (and not less) authoritative when they are carried out by seriously considering the perspective of those affected by them. Those dismissing the accounts of the directly involved as too biased rule out this simple, plausible claim: that some views have a great truth value precisely because they are anchored in lived experiences.
This may lead us to accept that certain people or groups have privileged access to bits of reality. One big step to take is to recognise that those who have lived through particular experiences or injustices like racism, sexism, and economic marginalisation may have a clearer understanding of those same problems. More importantly, their knowledge is to be treated as more than personal testimony; it often shows accuracy and soundness, and should be considered an important tool for understanding the world.
On the other hand, standpoint theorists do not claim that only those directly affected can understand a given issue. Rather, they affirm that we can adopt others’ perspectives and see the world from their point of view. Through careful listening and the humility to accept unfamiliar frameworks, individuals can engage meaningfully with different standpoints. Through new conceptual tools, they can not only see important facts they used not to notice but also find ways to explain them effectively.
Still, no one person or group can adopt every perspective. This brings us to, perhaps, the most practical and political lesson: we should endorse a deliberative model for understanding social reality, including bearers of different forms of perspectival knowledge. Consciousness-raising is powerful but often slow and partial; this is why we should listen to those who already possess a certain understanding and can bring informative insights into the debate. Concretely speaking, we should ensure that in deliberative and decision-making processes, different lived experiences and standpoints are represented, heard, and valued. This is not merely a matter of justice but of deliberative effectiveness. If the aim of deliberation is to understand the social world in order to improve it, then it cannot afford to leave crucial epistemic resources aside.
In questions of public interest we should ask how people from different social standpoints would approach the problem, what perspective they would add to the debate. More importantly, we should include into the public and institutional sphere the groups that usually struggle to be heard. Deliberation is not about proving either one or the other right; it is a collective enterprise aiming at a shared, synthetic solution. Its effectiveness lies in the participation of all the affected and interested parties. In this sense, giving minorities concrete consideration does not amount to believing that they know the truth or that they provide the best solutions. Rather, it only means that their perspective is valued as an essential part of a broader picture. Without those contributions, we risk building flawed knowledge and solutions.
REFERENCES
Toole, Briana. 2019. “From Standpoint Epistemology to Epistemic Oppression.” Hypatia 34 (4): 598-618. https://doi.org/10.1111/hypa.12496
Toole, Briana. 2021. “Recent Work in Standpoint Epistemology.” Analysis 81 (2): 338-350. https://doi.org/10.1093/analys/anab026
Toole, Briana. 2022. “Demarginalizing Standpoint Epistemology.” Episteme 19 (1): 47-65. https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2020.8.
Wylie, Alyson. 2003. “Why Standpoint Matters.” In Science and Other Cultures: Issues in Philosophies of Sciences and Technology, eds. Robert Figueroa and Sandra Harding, 26-48. New York: Routledge.
Smith, Dorothy. 1988. “The Everyday World as Problematic: A Feminist Sociology.” Boston: Northeastern University Press.
Hartsock, Nancy. 1983. “The Feminist Standpoint: Developing the Ground for a Specifically Feminist Historical Materialism.” In Discovering Reality: Feminist Perspectives in Epistemology, Metaphysics, Methodology and Philosophy of Science, eds. Sandra Hardin and Merril M. Hintikka, 283-310. Dordrecht: Reidel. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-306-48017-4_15