Dissertation, University of Sheffield (2018)

Authors
Trystan S. Goetze
Harvard University
Abstract
This thesis concerns our moral and epistemic responsibilities regarding our concepts. I argue that certain concepts can be morally, epistemically, or socially problematic. This is particularly concerning with regard to our concepts of social kinds, which may have both descriptive and evaluative aspects. Being ignorant of certain concepts, or possessing mistaken conceptions, can be problematic for similar reasons, and contributes to various forms of epistemic injustice. I defend an expanded view of a type of epistemic injustice known as ‘hermeneutical injustice’, where widespread conceptual ignorance puts members of marginalized groups at risk of their distinctive and important experiences lacking intelligible interpretations. Together, I call the use of problematic concepts or the ignorance of appropriate concepts ‘conceptual incapacities’. I discuss the conditions under which we may be responsible for our conceptual incapacities on several major theories of responsibility, developing my own account of responsibility in the process, according to which we are responsible for something just in case it was caused by one of our reasons-responsive constitutive psychological traits. However, I argue that regardless of whether we are responsible for something, we may still be required to take responsibility for it. Whether or not we are responsible for our conceptual incapacities, we are required to reflect critically upon them in a variety of scenarios that throw our use of those concepts into question. I consider the method of conceptual engineering — the philosophical critique and revision of concepts — as one way we might take responsibility for our concepts, or at least, defer that duty to experts. But, this top-down model of conceptual revision is insufficient. Using a pragmatist model of the social epistemology of morality, I argue that conceptual inquiry is a social endeavour in which we are all required to participate, to some degree.
Keywords conceptual responsibility  moral responsibility  conceptual engineering  epistemic injustice  hermeneutical injustice  ethics of thinking
Categories (categorize this paper)
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

 PhilArchive page | Other versions
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Reasons and Persons.Derek Parfit - 1984 - Oxford University Press.
The Language of Thought.Jerry A. Fodor - 1975 - Harvard University Press.
What We Owe to Each Other.Thomas Scanlon - 1998 - Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

View all 113 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

Conceptual Competence Injustice.Derek Egan Anderson - 2017 - Social Epistemology 31 (2):210-223.
Conceptual Responsibility.Trystan S. Goetze - 2021 - Inquiry: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Philosophy 64 (1-2):20-45.
Hermeneutical Injustice and Liberatory Education.Benjamin Elzinga - 2018 - Southern Journal of Philosophy 56 (1):59-82.
A Critique of Hermeneutical Injustice.Laura Beeby - 2011 - Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society 111 (3pt3):479-486.
The Moral Responsibility of the Hospital.Richard T. De George - 1982 - Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 7 (1):87-100.
Responsibility for Past Injustice: How to Shift the Burden.Chandran Kukathas - 2003 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 2 (2):165-190.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2021-07-16

Total views
86 ( #128,662 of 2,461,959 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
77 ( #9,599 of 2,461,959 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes