Epistemology is said to be the study of knowledge and the composition of knowledge. Relatedly, feminist epistemology questions how gender and identity influence knowledge and how this may vary based on our social assumptions and stereotypes about gender roles. Many argue that gender, in fact, influences knowledge because these assumptions have a profound impact on how we view an individual. Along with stereotypes and the effect of gender, epistemic injustices often occur, in many cases direct and disadvantageous to women. As Fricker recognizes, this type of injustice develops as a result of the connection between social power and knowledge production, thus causing an altered level of credibility and truth value. The following are examples of epistemic injustice that appear in the form of testimonial injustice, speaking for others, and mansplaining. In the following article I will demonstrate how, often, what women say compared to men is considered much less significant and considered less justified. I will use written works composed by Miranda Fricker, Linda Alcoff, and Rebecca Solnit as a way to support my thesis regarding the great disadvantage women experience in society when dealing with credibility. It is also a very current issue as it occurs in everyday society and is experienced by all women. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an Original Essay In order for society to put an end to this, we all need to be aware and aware of these preconceived notions. Miranda Fricker discusses the widespread issue of epistemic injustice that occurs daily in society, focusing primarily on the issue of testimonial injustice. This occurs when an individual receives a reduced level of credibility due to their identity or certain characteristics they possess. Fricker classifies this form of injustice by stating that "testimonial injustice occurs when prejudice causes a listener to give a devalued level of credibility to the speaker's word... it puts someone at an unfair disadvantage when it comes to giving a meaning to one's social experiences" (Fricker, 1). What causes this type of injustice is when social power creates an imbalance in power dynamics, which then influences the positioning of certain individuals in the world on a hierarchical scale. Therefore, this type of social conception has a large impact on how individuals are interpreted and the amount of credibility they receive as a result of their identity. As Fricker explains, the power that identity has over how an individual is interpreted occurs unconsciously, in the form of “collective social imagination” (Fricker, 14). Identity plays a role regarding both the speaker and the listener in a given situation, which is what happens in the example of testimonial injustice. In these types of situations, the identity of the person giving the testimony impacts the level of credibility he or she will receive and the truth value derived from what he or she says. In many cases involving women, the evidence or testimony they present is deemed insufficient due to their gender, which is incredibly problematic. This scenario demonstrates a clear form of injustice that occurs due to previously conceived notions that influence how the listener perceives the speaker and their ability to know due to their gender.The listener provides the individual speaker with an excess or deficit of credibility as a result of this social power imbalance causing them to have a tainted view of the individual (Fricker, 17). Excess credibility is said to occur when the speaker is given a greater amount of credibility than he deserves, and credibility deficit is when he is given less credibility than he would have. In many situations, women experience a deficit of credibility. As Fricker demonstrates, testimonial injustice is based on the concept of “identity-prejudicial credibility deficit” as it allows social conceptions and stereotypical views of what it means to be a man or a woman to influence their ability to know. Although some argue that identity power plays a large and important role in testimony, I disagree with this notion based on the fact that an individual's gender should not be a factor influencing their credibility. While Fricker makes a rather convincing argument regarding the epistemic injustices that occur on a daily basis, Linda Alcoff also discusses this issue, questioning whether it is ever valid to “speak for others” (Alcoff, 7). Both of these writers discuss how identity affects what is said in both the speaker and the listener, as well as the fact that this is a social issue and not an individual problem. As Alcoff states, the particular “speaker and listener influences whether a statement is considered true, well-reasoned, a convincing argument, or a significant idea” (Alcoff, 13). Therefore, the identity of the individual on both sides will impact the message conveyed and its importance. The reason this is such an epistemic injustice is because because privileged individuals speak on behalf of the less privileged or those who are disadvantaged, this reinforces oppression towards those on whose behalf one speaks. The reason for this is that an issue of representation occurs when someone speaks on behalf of another, thus potentially impacting those being represented through truth value or knowledge capacity. The way in which a certain message will be perceived by those who listen to it and the meaning it has will depend on who says it (Alcoff, 13). This is a great epistemic injustice due to the fact that what someone says of or for another will always influence that individual's experience. This is often aimed at women as men in many situations feel the need to represent and speak on behalf of women and explain their needs, goals, situation and who they are. Unfortunately, what men say is very commonly considered to have much more meaning or meaning behind it than women. This is a problem because men shouldn't feel the need to represent and speak on behalf of women when they haven't endured the same kinds of experiences or don't fully understand what some women have had to go through. These epistemic injustices that occur have a great impact on all women in society, as they manifest in many different forms and occur on a daily basis. These injustices are an important issue to recognize as they affect society in how women are viewed and treated. The social phenomenon commonly known as “mansplaining” is an example of the effect these injustices have on the community, as it is quite evident in today's society. Mansplaining is discussed by Rebecca Solnit, in Men Explain Things to Me, where she defines this term as when men feel the need to explain something to women or clarify what things mean, despite the fact that they themselves may not.