How to Fight Linguistic Injustice in Science: Equity Measures and Mitigating Agents

ABSTRACT

Though a common language of science allows for easier communication of the results among researchers, the use of lingua franca also comes with the cost of losing some of the diverse ideas and results arising from the plurality of languages. Following Quine’s famous thesis about the indeterminacy of translation, we elaborate on the inherent loss of diverse ideas when only one language of science is used. Non-native speakers sometimes experience epistemic injustice due to their language proficiency and consequently, their scientific insights get marginalized. Thus, it is important epistemically to include the results of all researchers independent of their native language. As a solution, we promote epistemic equity and inclusion both on the individual level and on the level of the scientific community. Epistemic equity means that researchers who suffer disadvantages because of their language skills get support from the rest of the scientific community that will compensate for their disadvantage and at the same time facilitate their epistemic inclusion. This can be achieved through the introduction of mitigating agents – the individuals and organizations that ought to serve as a communication bridge between individual researchers and the scientific community.

Video Abstract

Read the transcript

Watch the video on Vimeo

© 2022 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group

KEYWORDS:

• Linguistic injustice
• science
• equity measures
• mitigating agents

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Georg Theiner and the editorial team of Social Epistemology for their professional and supportive handling of our work.

Disclosure Statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1. Available at: https://contesi.wordpress.com/bp/?fbclid=IwAR14IwAlLss2p-Ta7reL7CF9wX8EoWWU-z-4ywtMZPCyBgFEvtXoIMwSH8c (Last Accessed 22nd of January, 2022.).

2. The discussion is available at: https://twitter.com/nescio13/status/1527568177831587840.

3. He claims the evidence of linguistic injustice is more speculative in nature and that other factors, such as the lack of experience or being part of a smaller scientific community, are the main causes of the isolation of researchers (Hyland 2016). While we do agree there are a plethora of reasons for one’s isolation, we shall try to prove that language proficiency is as important as the rest of them.

4. While in the social context this is true for any marginalized group, in the context of this research the focus is mostly on marginalized scientists – i.e. those who are non-native English speakers, who come from impoverished countries that lack resources for quality scientific research, etc.

5. Apart from the epistemic considerations, one can also investigate ethical grounding for linguistic plurality. Normative justification for equity can be grounded in Rawls’ second part of the second principle of justice, in literature known as the difference principle. According to this principle, social and economic inequalities are justified if they are ‘attached to positions and offices open to all’ (Rawls [1971], 1999, 53). Rawls offers a few interpretations of this openness – one of them being based on liberal equality – according to which certain positions are not just formally open to anyone, but also realistically achievable (Rawls [1971], 1999, 63). Unequal distribution of social and economic resources is justified if it predominantly benefits the ones who are least privileged in a given society. This interpretation allows individuals from the marginalized social background to deserve the same recognition and opportunities as their more privileged peers. While Rawls himself does not engage in an inquiry of the scientific community, nor does he use the term of equity, it seems that his definition of justified inequality resonates with benefits we argue should be given to less-privileged researchers. However, such argumentation is more applicable in ethical than in epistemic context, since it cannot guarantee epistemic diversity, but only the fair treatment in a moral sense.

6. The platform for assisting non-native English speakers in writing, by algorithmically correcting mistakes. https://www.grammarly.com/.

7. It is worth noting that the editorial board of Social Epistemology participates in editing the final version of a manuscript and, when needed, even offers a pre-editing service. This pre-editing process includes occasional reformulation of the title and the abstract so that the non-native speaker gets the best possible feedback on their paper. This is an example of a good mitigation practice and an important step in assisting non-native speakers.

8. That is, assuming that the both groups share the desire to communicate with each other.

9. In his other works (e.g. Van Parijs 2007, 2011), Van Parijs more openly disputes the idea of linguistic diversity having intrinsic value and sees it rather as a side effect of achieving equal dignity.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Aleksandra Vučković

Aleksandra Vučković is a Research Assistant at the Institute for Philosophy of the Faculty of Philosophy, University of Belgrade. She got her BA and MA degrees at the University of Belgrade, where she is currently writing her PhD thesis. Her fields of interest include: Epistemology, Social Epistemology, Philosophy of Science and Philosophy of Language.

Vlasta Sikimić

Vlasta Sikimić is a Research Fellow in Philosophy at the University of Tübingen, where she taught Social Epistemology, Information Dynamics in Groups, etc. She mainly publishes on the topics of Social Epistemology of Science, Epistemic Logic, and Philosophy of AI. In her research, Vlasta promotes the idea of increasing knowledge acquisition through an inclusive and supportive environment. She is also active in professional organizations. For example, she is a member of the Steering Committee of the East European Network for Philosophy of Science and the Chair of the Organizing Committee of the European Philosophy of Science Conference in Belgrade in 2023.