2026/04/08 by Zamir Kadodia, Joel Krueger · 2 voices
Social Sciences · Arts and Humanities · Neuroscience · #Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies #Epistemology, Ethics, and Metaphysics #Neuroethics, Human Enhancement, Biomedical Innovations
paper · doi:10.1080/09515089.2026.2657453
Miranda Fricker’s concept of “epistemic injustice” has been crucial in revealing how identity prejudice can wrong individuals in their capacity as knowers. Yet this framework implicitly presupposes neurotypical norms of social communication and interaction as the baseline of epistemic exchange. In this paper, we argue that such presuppositions obscure how epistemic injustices against neurodivergent people often emerge not through identity prejudice but rather through socio-material environments that privilege certain neurotypes over others. Drawing on frameworks such as the neurodiversity paradigm and niche construction theory, we reframe the concept of epistemic injustice as a distributed phenomenon that is enacted through the interaction of cognitive agents, cultural practices, and material affordances to accommodate these more structural forms of epistemic injustice. In particular, we argue that José Medina’s concept of “meta-lucidity” can be used as a methodological resource for reconstructing epistemic niches such that neurodivergent perspectives are given a role in co-constituting the fabric of a “neurodiversified” social imagination.