Epistemic violence in psychological science: Can knowledge of, from, and for the (othered) people solve the problem?

Abstract

A primary target of Indigenous psychologists and critical psychologists is the epistemic violence found in mainstream research. The epistemic violence derives from two alleged mainstream tendencies: (a) omitting concepts/conceptions of othered peoples and (b) interpreting observed group differences to be caused by inherent inferiorities of othered peoples. In seeking remedial research practice, some theoretical psychologists distinguish (a) psychological knowledge from and for the folk, which they advocate and (b) psychological “knowledge” about the folk, the alleged source of objectification of othered peoples. Though seemingly self-evident, this for/about prepositional divide may not be clear. First, mainstream epistemic violence often depends on folk notions. Second, the use in science of folk concepts/conceptions has advanced oppressive purposes, whereas some mainstream findings may serve progressive goals. I exemplify with race concepts, especially racialized essentialism and dehumanization, and I demonstrate how mainstream science sometimes reveals mechanisms of othering that may inform progressive social reform efforts.

Expression of Story: Ethical considerations for participatory, community- and arts-based research relationships

“…As researchers and social workers, the authors are compelled by the need to disrupt ways of doing research that are experienced as a form of epistemic violence (Brunner, 2016;Held, 2019;Penak, 2019;Spivak, 1988). We wanted to learn about the impact of being a community-based, artist participant in a participatory, community-and artsbased research project.…”

Objecting, subjecting, and epistemic diversity

“…Held (2020) maintains that objective research provides us with the authority (or “epistemic warrant”) to repudiate racist, sexist, and other oppressive claims. Her concern is that by rejecting objective knowledge (i.e., embracing “anti-objectivism”), critical and Indigenous psychologists relativize knowledge, which in turn makes it difficult for them to counter oppressive demagoguery.…”

“…Barbara Held’s (2020) examination of epistemic violence serves as a warning against the dangers of theoretical and methodological hubris. Her article marks an effort to bridge the divide that sometimes arises between “mainstream psychology” and theorists associated with critical and Indigenous psychology.…”

“…Although she readily acknowledges that mainstream psychology has often employed traditional research methods in a manner that has intentionally or unintentionally oppressed Indigenous peoples, she urges us not to throw the baby out with the bath water. Offering a full-throated defense of using objective research methods to advance progressive ends, Held (2020) argues that:Progress depends on appreciating not only the experiences of othered peoples but also of those who participate in the othering, intentionally or not. Pragmatically, this includes objective knowledge of the oppressive consequences of holding dehumanizing beliefs about othered peoples to be objectively true.…”

Epistemic violence in the time of coronavirus: From the legacy of the western limits of Spivak’s ‘can the subaltern speak’ to an alternative to the ‘neoliberal model of development’

“…Althusser's denial of the subject in Marxist science also aligns it with the epistemic violence implied by western social science's general denial of its own subjectivity, while inversely, with its claim of the non-objective subjectivity of non-western forms of knowledge (Held, 2020, Neilson, 2020b. Moreover, by denying the causal role of intellectuals and knowledge in the making of history, Althusser has effectively blocked advancement of the knowledge needed to make a "social bloc" and integrally, to design of a counter-hegemonic project.…”