Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T18:55:45.922Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Habermas, Virtue Epistemology, and Religious Justifications in the Public Sphere

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Jeffrey Epstein
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Jürgen Habermas's recent challenge to secular citizens calling for greater inclusivity of religious justifications in the public sphere opens new epistemological debates that could benefit from the rich insights of feminist epistemologists. Despite certain theoretical tensions, there is some common ground between Habermas and recent work in feminist epistemology. Specifically, this article explores the shared interests between Habermas and one feminist theorist in particular, Miranda Fricker. I choose Fricker because her formulation of the epistemological and ethical hybrid virtues of testimonial justice and hermeneutical justice provide efficacious theoretical and practical tools capable of deepening the epistemological basis of Habermas's challenge to secular citizens. After a detailed analysis of Habermas's and Fricker's respective epistemological positions, I argue that Fricker's analysis provides a rich framework for thinking through questions of power, identity, and credibility with respect to religious justifications in the public sphere. In conclusion, this article emphasizes the importance of fostering more robust and just epistemic communities capable of countering the social, political, and ethical injustices of epistemic disauthorization and marginalization.

Type
Open Issue Content
Information
Hypatia , Volume 29 , Issue 2 , Spring 2014 , pp. 422 - 439
Copyright
Copyright © 2014 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Alcoff, Linda Martín. 2010. Epistemic identities. Episteme 7 (2): 128–37.Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald. 2001. Inquiries into truth and interpretation. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fricker, Miranda. 2007. Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fricker, Miranda. 2010. Replies to Alcoff, Goldberg, and Hookway on Epistemic Injustice. Episteme 7 (2): 164–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 2003. Truth and justification, ed. and trans. Fultner, Barbara. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Habermas, Jürgen. 2008. Between naturalism and religion: Philosophical essays. Trans. Cronin, Ciaran. Malden, Mass.: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Harding, Sandra. 2004. Introduction: Standpoint theory as a site of political, philosophical, and scientific debate. In The feminist standpoint theory reader: Intellectual and political controversies, ed. Harding, Sandra. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Spivak, Gayatri Chakravorty. 1994. Can the subaltern speak? In Colonial discourse and post‐colonial theory: A reader, ed. and intro. Williams, Patrick and Chrisman, Laura. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Wylie, Alison. 2004. Why standpoint matters. In The feminist standpoint theory reader: Intellectual and political controversies, ed. Harding, Sandra. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Young, Iris Marion. 1996. Communication and the other: Beyond deliberative democracy. In Democracy and difference: Contesting the boundaries of the political, ed. Benhabib, Seyla. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar