Philosophy Colloquium: Cat Saint-Croix

The Department of Philosophy is excited to welcome Cat Saint-Croix (University of Minnesota Twin Cities). Prof. Saint-Croix will deliver a talk as a part of our Philosophy Colloquium Series.

Title: Due Deference, Deux Fois

Abstract: Deference is essential to epistemology. When encountering testimony from someone with more expertise, you ought---all else being equal---defer to them. This is as true for scientists as it is for standpoint occupants. Recently, however, the idea that standpoint epistemology calls for deference has been challenged. Critics argue that epistemic deference is incurious, cowardly, and potentially harmful. But, these claims are mistaken. Far from being a hindrance to achieving feminist goals, deference is necessary for addressing the very concerns these critics raise. 

To demonstrate this, I show that their discontent arises from two sources: (1) an extreme conception of epistemic deference, and (2) the conflation of epistemic and social deference. As I'll show, Simple Deference---the extreme form of deference criticized by these authors---is unacceptable as an account of epistemic deference, independent of the concerns of standpoint epistemology. With a viable account of epistemic deference in hand, we see that epistemic deference is far from inimical to the practices of inquiry standpoint epistemologists recommend. After introducing and defending the term zetetic deference for these practices, I show that epistemic deference is an essential component thereof. Epistemic and zetetic deference are part, parcel, and prerequisite of the courageous, curious, inclusive inquiry standpoint theorists envision.