The Epistemology of Ignorance

Google defines epistemology as “the theory of knowledge” and “the investigation of what distinguishes justified belief from opinion.” The epistemology of ignorance is a much more specific term that involves the practice of identifying different types of ignorance, how they are relevant and sustained in today’s society, and possibly providing ways in which to work against or use these epistemologies of ignorance in favor of those being ‘ignored’. Nancy Tuana identifies multiple categories of ignorance, where ignorance ranges from being purposefully ignorant to purposefully being kept in the dark. Tuana’s categories provide a good example of the epistemology of ignorance, as she systematically breaks down reasons why people would be ignorant to situations without condemning or judging them. Perhaps as a political science major or as someone who wants to work in international development, I approach subjects with an action based mindset looking to identify and address the problem, and while solutions may not always be feasible, they still make me feel better. As such, my approach to the epistemology of ignorance is very similar: identify the problem and, if possible, find a way for the victims of that specific ignorance to reclaim their identities.

Tuana and Ortega’s articles and their discussion of loving ignorance and perception made me think of a professional women’s group I was involved with while interning in Belfast. My supervisor was the organizer of the group, but as we were outsiders, Americans, we were only there to facilitate and not dictate. As we watched and tried to help guide the group, I was constantly aware that, while we were all women, we had very different experiences involving culture and economics. Being both facilitators and outsiders, we were delicately balancing between loving ignorance and perception, and it was a struggle. I’m not sure how successful we were in always perceiving and not being ignorant or homogenizing their experiences, but we actively approached the group with the mindset of observer, not participant, wanting them to express their concerns without our commentary or distinct American solutions.