Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T05:33:13.176Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mary Astell on Bad Custom and Epistemic Injustice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2020

Allauren Samantha Forbes Open the ORCID record for Allauren Samantha Forbes [Opens in a new window]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Mary Astell is a fascinating seventeenth‐century figure whose work admits of many interpretations. One feature of her work that has received little attention is her focus on bad custom. This is surprising; Astell clearly regards bad custom as exerting a kind of epistemic power over agents, particularly women, in a way that limits their intellectual capacities. This article aims to link two contemporary sociopolitical/social‐epistemological projects by showing how a seventeenth‐century thinker anticipated these projects. Astell's account of bad custom shows that she was attuned to the kinds of institutional or structural explanations theorized by Sally Haslanger, and that she acknowledges that bad custom—as an institutional or structural explanation—is intimately linked with epistemic injustice, albeit a kind not yet captured by contemporary social epistemologists. I call this form of epistemic injustice found in Astell epistemic internalization injustice. I argue that the epistemic significance of Astell's notion of bad custom is that it enables us to understand how bad custom conditions human relations in such a way as to result in epistemic injustice. Through coming to understand her notion of bad custom, we can expand our understanding of social epistemic phenomena like epistemic injustice.

Type
Articles
Information
Hypatia , Volume 34 , Issue 4 , Fall 2019 , pp. 777 - 801
Copyright
Copyright © 2019, 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

Abramson, Kate. 2014. Turning up the lights on gaslighting. Philosophical Perspectives 28 (1): 1–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ahearn, Kathleen A. 2016. Mary Astell's account of feminine self‐esteem. In Feminist interpretations of Mary Astell, ed. Sowaal, Alice and Weiss, Penny. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Astell, Mary. 1695/1697/2003. A serious proposal to the ladies: Parts I and II, ed. Springborg, Patricia. Toronto: Broadview Press.Google Scholar
Astell, Mary. 1700/1997. Some reflections upon marriage. In Astell: Political writings, ed. Springborg, Patricia. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Astell, Mary, Norris, John. 1695/2005. Letters concerning the love of God, ed. Derek Taylor, E. and New, Melvyn. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Broad, Jacqueline. 2007. Astell, Cartesian ethics, and the critique of custom. In Mary Astell: Reason, gender, faith, ed. Kolbrener, William and Michelson, Michal. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Broad, Jacqueline. 2009. Mary Astell on virtuous friendship. Parergon 26 (2): 65–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broad, Jacqueline. 2014. Mary Astell on marriage and Lockean slavery. History of Political Thought 35 (4): 717–38.Google Scholar
Broad, Jacqueline. 2015. The philosophy of Mary Astell: An early modern theory of virtue. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryson, Cynthia. 1998. Mary Astell: Defender of the ‘disembodied mind’. Hypatia 13 (4): 40–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cornett, Judy M. 1997. Hoodwink'd by custom: The exclusion of women from juries in eighteenth‐century English law and literature. William and Mary Journal of Women and the Law 4 (1): 1–89.Google Scholar
Daukas, Nancy. 2006. Epistemic trust and social location. Episteme 3 (1): 109–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Detlefsen, Karen. 2016. Custom, freedom, and equality: Mary Astell on marriage and women's education. In Feminist interpretations of Mary Astell, ed. Sowaal, Alice and Weiss, Penny. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Detlefsen, Karen. 2017. Cartesianism and its feminist promise and limits. In Essays in honour of Desmond Clarke, ed. Gaukroger, Stephen and Wilson, Catherine. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dotson, Kristie. 2011. Tracking epistemic violence, tracking practices of silencing. Hypatia 26 (2): 236–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dotson, Kristie. 2012. A cautionary tale: On limiting epistemic oppression. Frontiers 33 (1): 24–47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forbes, Allauren Samantha. Unpublished. Mary Astell, friendship, and relational autonomy.Google Scholar
Fricker, Miranda. 2007. Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haslanger, Sally. 2016. What is a (social) structural explanation? Philosophical Studies 173 (1): 113–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hookway, Christopher. 2010. Some varieties of epistemic injustice: Reflections on Fricker. Episteme 7 (2): 151–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kendrick, Nancy. 2018. Mary Astell's theory of spiritual friendship. British Journal for the History of Philosophy 26 (1): 46–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolbrener, William. 2007. Astell's ‘design of friendship’ in Letters and A Serious Proposal, Part I. In Mary Astell: Reason, gender, faith, eds. Kolbrener, William and Michelson, Michal. Aldershot: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Kolbrener, William, and Michelson, Michal, eds. 2007. Mary Astell: Reason, gender, faith. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.Google Scholar
Lister, Andrew. 2004. Marriage and misogyny: The place of Mary Astell in the history of political thought. History of Political Thought 25 (1): 44–72.Google Scholar
McCraw, Benjamin. 2015. The nature of epistemic trust. Social Epistemology 29 (4): 413–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKinnon, Rachel. 2017. Allies behaving badly: Gaslighting as epistemic injustice. In The Routledge handbook of epistemic injustice, eds. Ian, James Kidd, Medina, José, and Pohlhaus, Gaile Jr. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Mills, Rebecca. 2000. ‘That tyrant custom’: The politics of custom in the poetry and prose of Augustan women writers. Women's Writing 7 (3): 391–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Origgi, Gloria. 2012. Epistemic injustice and epistemic trust. Social Epistemology 26 (2): 221–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perry, Ruth. 1990. Mary Astell: The feminist critique of possessive individualism. Eighteenth Century Studies 23 (4): 444–457.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pohlhaus, Gaile Jr. 2012. Relational knowing and epistemic injustice: Toward a theory of willful hermeneutical ignorance. Hypatia 27 (4): 715–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sowaal, Alice. 2007. Mary Astell's Serious Proposal: Mind, method, and custom. Philosophy Compass 2 (2): 227–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sowaal, Alice. 2016a. Mary Astell and the development of vice: Pride, courtship, and the women's human nature question. In Feminist interpretations of Mary Astell, ed. Sowaal, Alice and Weiss, Penny. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sowaal, Alice. 2016b. The emerging picture of Mary Astell's views. In Feminist interpretations of Mary Astell, ed. Sowaal, Alice and Weiss, Penny. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sowaal, Alice, and Weiss, Penny A., eds. 2016. Feminist interpretations of Mary Astell. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Springborg, Patricia. 2015. Mary Astell's critique of marriage practices. In Feminist moments: Reading feminist texts, ed. Smits, Katherine and Bruce, Susan. New York: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Weiss, Penny A. 2016. “From the throne to every private family”: Mary Astell as analyst of power. In Feminist interpretations of Mary Astell, ed. Sowaal, Alice and Weiss, Penny. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar