Epistemic auditing
Script error: No such module "Draft topics".
Script error: No such module "AfC topic".
Epistemic auditing is an investigatory practice. Its provenance is the groundbreaking contribution that Miranda Fricker, the British philosopher, made to epistemology with her concept of epistemic injustice[1].
Epistemic auditing applies to public sector organizations. It is defined as ‘the practice of investigating the epistemic capacity of a public sector organization’. The concept of the epistemic capacity of a public sector organization implies that it knows enough to fulfil efficiently the functions that it is legislated to fulfil.
An online-based epistemic community [2] comprising an organizational epistemologist [3][4] and an expert with relevant expertise can undertake an audit. Audits fundamentally comprise investigations into the qualifications of the managers of public sector organizations. Consequently the epistemic capacity of a public sector organization implies the adequacy of the qualifications of its managers.
A public sector manager might resist being audited by an epistemic community by practicing ignorance[5][6]. For example, the manager might try to conceal their ignorance by responding to an audit evasively or by ignoring it, in which case they would perpetrate censorship or silencing[7].
Independently of an occurrence of resistance by a public sector manager, an epistemic community should aim to achieve authority[8]. For an epistemic community to achieve authority, it should be respected and trusted. The community can achieve respect by practicing diligence[9], by exclusively concentrating upon the issue about the adequacy of the qualifications of the managers of the organization and by refraining from speaking beyond its competence. The community can achieve trust by being open and transparent.
Two types of epistemic audit can be undertaken about a public sector organization, an external one and an internal one. An external audit can be undertaken by searching the Internet for claims and pronouncements made by the organization. An internal audit can be undertaken from information that is obtained from within the organization.
An audit can be shallow or deep, which will depend upon whether it is external or internal. An external audit will begin by being shallow but might or might not become deep. In contrast, an internal audit will likely become deep because of the opportunity that is afforded to ascertain the extent and the cause of the ignorance in the organization. An internal audit is preferable to an external one because of its greater potential to become deep. However, an internal audit would require the organization to extend an invitation for an internal audit to be undertaken, which might not be easy or might even be impossible to obtain.
A public sector organization might not engage with an undertaking of an external audit. However, its non-engagement need not result in the failure of the audit. This is because the audit might prompt the organization to abandon invalid taken-for-granted assumptions which it formerly held, in which case, the audit would be partially efficacious. However, an audit should aim to be completely efficacious.
References[edit]
- ↑ Fricker, Miranda (2007). Epistemic Injustice Power & The Ethics of Knowing. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Search this book on
- ↑ Gunn, Hanna Kiri (2020). "How should we build epistemic community". The Journal of Speculative Philosophy. 34 (4): 561-581. doi:10.5325/jspecphil.34.4.0561. Unknown parameter
|s2cid=ignored (help) - ↑ Tsoukas, Haridimos (2005). "5 What is organizational knowledge?". In Tsoukas, Haridimo. Complex knowledge Studies in organizational epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Search this book on
- ↑ Seirafi, Kasra (2013). Organizational epistemology Understanding knowledge in organizations. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag. Search this book on
- ↑ Marder, Lev (2015). "30 Democracy and practices of ignorance". In Gross, Matthias; McGoey, Linsey. Routledge International Handbook of Ignorance Studies. Abingdon, Oxfordshire: Routledge. Search this book on
- ↑ Paul, Katharina T.; Haddad, Christian (2023). "21 The pandemic as we know it A policy studies perspective on ignorance and nonknowledge in COVID-19 governance". Routledge International Handbook of Ignorance Studies. London: Routledge. Search this book on
- ↑ Spivak, Gayatri (1998). "Can the subaltern speak?". In Nelson, Cary; Grossberg, Lawrence. Marxism and the interpretation of culture. Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press. pp. 282–283. Search this book on
- ↑ Zagzebski, Linda Trinkaus (2012). Epistemic authority: A theory of trust, authority, and autonomy in belief. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Search this book on
- ↑ Hayward, Tim (2019). "Three duties of epistemic diligence". Journal of Social Philosophy. 50 (4): 536-561. doi:10.1111/josp.12319. Unknown parameter
|s2cid=ignored (help)
This article "Epistemic auditing" is from Wikipedia. The list of its authors can be seen in its historical and/or the page Edithistory:Epistemic auditing. Articles copied from Draft Namespace on Wikipedia could be seen on the Draft Namespace of Wikipedia and not main one.
