偏见是对卓越的错误归因

IF 0.6 2区 哲学 0 PHILOSOPHY
Jessie Munton
{"title":"偏见是对卓越的错误归因","authors":"Jessie Munton","doi":"10.1111/phib.12250","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>What does it take to be prejudiced against a particular group? And is prejudice always epistemically problematic, or are there epistemically innocent forms of prejudice? In this paper, I argue that certain important forms of prejudice can be wholly constituted by the differential accessibility of certain pieces of information. These accessibility relations constitute a salience structure. A subject is prejudiced against a particular group when their salience structure is unduly organised around that category. This is significant because it reveals that prejudice does not require the presence of any explicit cognitive or emotive attitude, nor need it manifest in behaviour: it can be solely constituted by the <i>organisation</i> of information, where that information may be accurate and well-founded. Nonetheless, by giving an account of ‘undue organisation’ in epistemic terms, I show that this account is compatible with an understanding of prejudice as a negatively valenced epistemic category.</p>","PeriodicalId":45646,"journal":{"name":"Analytic Philosophy","volume":"64 1","pages":"1-19"},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2021-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"17","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prejudice as the misattribution of salience☆\",\"authors\":\"Jessie Munton\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/phib.12250\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>What does it take to be prejudiced against a particular group? And is prejudice always epistemically problematic, or are there epistemically innocent forms of prejudice? In this paper, I argue that certain important forms of prejudice can be wholly constituted by the differential accessibility of certain pieces of information. These accessibility relations constitute a salience structure. A subject is prejudiced against a particular group when their salience structure is unduly organised around that category. This is significant because it reveals that prejudice does not require the presence of any explicit cognitive or emotive attitude, nor need it manifest in behaviour: it can be solely constituted by the <i>organisation</i> of information, where that information may be accurate and well-founded. Nonetheless, by giving an account of ‘undue organisation’ in epistemic terms, I show that this account is compatible with an understanding of prejudice as a negatively valenced epistemic category.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":45646,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Analytic Philosophy\",\"volume\":\"64 1\",\"pages\":\"1-19\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"17\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Analytic Philosophy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/phib.12250\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"0\",\"JCRName\":\"PHILOSOPHY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Analytic Philosophy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/phib.12250","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"PHILOSOPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 17

摘要

对某一特定群体抱有偏见需要什么?偏见总是在认识上有问题,还是存在认识上无辜的偏见形式?在本文中,我认为某些重要形式的偏见可以完全由某些信息的差异可及性构成。这些可达性关系构成了一个显著性结构。当一个受试者的显著性结构围绕某一特定群体过度组织时,他们就会对该群体产生偏见。这一点意义重大,因为它表明,偏见不需要任何明确的认知或情绪态度,也不需要在行为中表现出来:它可以完全由信息的组织构成,而信息可能是准确和有根据的。尽管如此,通过用认识论的术语描述“过度组织”,我表明这种描述与对偏见作为一个负价认识范畴的理解是一致的。告诉我在哪里孕育了幻想,是在心里还是在脑子里?如何生长,如何滋养?回复回复。(莎士比亚威尼斯商人3.2.63)引言一个人需要什么才能对特定的人口群体产生偏见,例如种族主义或性别歧视?这个问题的答案主要有三个方面。根据许多人的说法,偏见需要一种特殊的认知态度——例如,对某种命题的明确或隐含认可,即所讨论的群体在某种程度上是低劣的。一些叙述增加了一个认识条件:所讨论的命题是错误的或非理性的。第二个因素是对相关群体的负面情绪,如厌恶或厌恶。第三个因素是行为。大多数账户都是混合型的,需要这些因素的组合。在本文中,我对偏见所需的条件进行了最低限度的说明,否认了上述三个条件。偏见不必表现在行为中,也不取决于负面情绪,或对有关群体的任何特定主张的认可。相反,偏见可能纯粹通过信息的组织而产生。信息是由个人的思想和他们更广泛的社会背景组织成的,我称之为显著性结构,被理解为信息的可访问性排序。这篇论文的中心主张是,有问题的显著性结构,过度组织在1周围的突出性结构对于本文早期草稿的反馈,我感谢Georgi Gardiner、Huw Green、加布里埃尔·约翰逊、Susanna Siegel,以及剑桥罗宾逊学院的观众,科隆大学的信仰伦理学研讨会,以及哈佛大学主办的关于突出性的在线研讨会。2参见Levy(2016),在评估对其他种族群体的隐性偏见是否构成种族主义时,他采用了多嘴多舌、行为和情感标准之间的三重区别
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Prejudice as the misattribution of salience☆

What does it take to be prejudiced against a particular group? And is prejudice always epistemically problematic, or are there epistemically innocent forms of prejudice? In this paper, I argue that certain important forms of prejudice can be wholly constituted by the differential accessibility of certain pieces of information. These accessibility relations constitute a salience structure. A subject is prejudiced against a particular group when their salience structure is unduly organised around that category. This is significant because it reveals that prejudice does not require the presence of any explicit cognitive or emotive attitude, nor need it manifest in behaviour: it can be solely constituted by the organisation of information, where that information may be accurate and well-founded. Nonetheless, by giving an account of ‘undue organisation’ in epistemic terms, I show that this account is compatible with an understanding of prejudice as a negatively valenced epistemic category.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Analytic Philosophy
Analytic Philosophy PHILOSOPHY-
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信