Epistemic injustice suffered by patients with rare diseases, poorly understood diseases, and underdiagnosed diseases, and the epistemic advantage granted by these diseases.

IF 3.1 2区 哲学 Q1 ETHICS
Mar Rosàs Tosas
{"title":"Epistemic injustice suffered by patients with rare diseases, poorly understood diseases, and underdiagnosed diseases, and the epistemic advantage granted by these diseases.","authors":"Mar Rosàs Tosas","doi":"10.1007/s11019-025-10285-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Fricker (Epistemic Injustice. Power and the Ethics of Knowing, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2007) coined the term epistemic injustice to refer to the downgrading of credibility of speakers provoked either by prejudices-which she labeled testimonial injustice-or by a gap in interpretative resources that account for a given phenomenon-which she referred to as hermeneutical injustice. This paper reviews the existing literature on how patients with rare diseases, poorly understood diseases, and underdiagnosed diseases are questioned by the healthcare practitioners who assist them in order to explore how they suffer from both these types of epistemic injustice. At the same time, the paper argues that the very epistemic marginalization suffered by these patients actually grants them some epistemic advantages over patients with better-known diseases, and even some meta-epistemic advantages-that is, a deeper understanding of how the very taxonomy that marginalizes or excludes them is, to some extent, a sociocultural construction. The paper therefore applies the notion of \"epistemic advantage\", coined by contemporary standpoint theorists, to the field of healthcare.</p>","PeriodicalId":47449,"journal":{"name":"Medicine Health Care and Philosophy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicine Health Care and Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11019-025-10285-4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ETHICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Fricker (Epistemic Injustice. Power and the Ethics of Knowing, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2007) coined the term epistemic injustice to refer to the downgrading of credibility of speakers provoked either by prejudices-which she labeled testimonial injustice-or by a gap in interpretative resources that account for a given phenomenon-which she referred to as hermeneutical injustice. This paper reviews the existing literature on how patients with rare diseases, poorly understood diseases, and underdiagnosed diseases are questioned by the healthcare practitioners who assist them in order to explore how they suffer from both these types of epistemic injustice. At the same time, the paper argues that the very epistemic marginalization suffered by these patients actually grants them some epistemic advantages over patients with better-known diseases, and even some meta-epistemic advantages-that is, a deeper understanding of how the very taxonomy that marginalizes or excludes them is, to some extent, a sociocultural construction. The paper therefore applies the notion of "epistemic advantage", coined by contemporary standpoint theorists, to the field of healthcare.

罕见病、不了解疾病、诊断不足疾病患者的认知不公,以及这些疾病带来的认知优势。
认知的不公正。《权力与认知伦理》,牛津大学出版社,牛津,2007年)创造了“认知不公正”一词,指的是由于偏见(她称之为证言不公正)或解释资源的差距(她称之为解释性不公正)引起的说话者可信度的降低。本文回顾了现有文献中关于罕见疾病患者、对疾病了解甚少的患者和未被诊断的患者是如何被帮助他们的医疗从业者质疑的,以探讨他们是如何遭受这两种类型的认知不公正的。与此同时,论文认为,这些患者所遭受的认知边缘化实际上赋予了他们相对于患有更广为人知疾病的患者的一些认知优势,甚至是一些元认知优势——也就是说,更深入地理解边缘化或排斥他们的分类在某种程度上是一种社会文化建构。因此,本文将当代立场理论家提出的“认知优势”概念应用于医疗保健领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
4.80%
发文量
64
期刊介绍: Medicine, Health Care and Philosophy: A European Journal is the official journal of the European Society for Philosophy of Medicine and Health Care. It provides a forum for international exchange of research data, theories, reports and opinions in bioethics and philosophy of medicine. The journal promotes interdisciplinary studies, and stimulates philosophical analysis centered on a common object of reflection: health care, the human effort to deal with disease, illness, death as well as health, well-being and life. Particular attention is paid to developing contributions from all European countries, and to making accessible scientific work and reports on the practice of health care ethics, from all nations, cultures and language areas in Europe.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信