On Epistemic Domination

"The flow of evidence is pervasively impacted by social dynamics. One straightforward illustration of this point is that individuals routinely give evidence to one another. If I want you to believe that my dog's name is Buffy, I might simply tell you her name or I might show you her passport. But if for some reason I don't want you to know my dog's name, I might withhold this evidence from you, and might even discourage or prevent others from giving you the relevant evidence."

"The ability to control the flow of evidence is a substantial sort of power, one that enables its possessors to influence what others believe and what others can rationalize. Notably, this ability, and hence the sort of power it implies, is not evenly distributed-some have a far greater degree of control over the flow of evidence than others. I use the term epistemic domination to refer to imbalances in the ability to control the evidence available to the other party."

"In general, epistemic domination occurs when one party can control the evidence available to another party, but not vice-versa. So understood, epistemic domination can come in degrees. Parents typically stand in a strong position of epistemic domination over their children, but their capacity to control their children's evidence typically wanes over time. Prominent media figures exert a degree of epistemic domination over audiences, but this domination is substantially mitigated by the high-choice nature of the contemporary media environment."

Social dynamics pervasively shape how evidence moves between people. Individuals routinely offer, reveal, withhold, or obstruct evidence, altering what others believe and can justify. Control over evidence functions as a significant form of power that influences beliefs and rationalizations. That power is unevenly distributed, producing epistemic domination when one party can control the evidence available to another but not vice versa. Epistemic domination varies in degree across relationships: parents often dominate children early on, media figures influence audiences within a high-choice environment, and authoritarian states can both impose evidence and restrict access to alternative information.

Read at Apaonline