Unjust Aspects of the Epistemic Marketplace: Idea Appropriation, Bullshit, and Epistemic Injustice

Abstract Epistemic injustice happens when a subject is wronged in their “capacity as a knower.” This paper argues that speakers/writers and hearers/readers suffer epistemic injustice under two scenarios: idea appropriation and bullshitting. Epistemic injustice happens when a speaker or writer suffers idea appropriation, where they are deprived of the credit and benefits of their cognitive labor, or when epistemic agents consume bullshit that exploits their limited access to the institutional resources required to interrogate and resist it, treating them as a mere means to an end, e.g., when a politician bullshits voters to secure their vote at election time. These unsavory practices are incentivized by reputational boosts and other social goods with the risk of reputational damage if detected. This paper ends by reviewing how widespread epistemic injustice hampers the epistemic marketplace.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Episteme
Published
2026-09-18
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/epi.2026.10134
Primary Topic
Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

Unjust Aspects of the Epistemic Marketplace: Idea Appropriation, Bullshit, and Epistemic Injustice

Jimmy Alfonso Licon
Episteme
Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies
article

Unjust Aspects of the Epistemic Marketplace: Idea Appropriation, Bullshit, and Epistemic Injustice

Jimmy Alfonso Licon
article en

Abstract

Abstract Epistemic injustice happens when a subject is wronged in their “capacity as a knower.” This paper argues that speakers/writers and hearers/readers suffer epistemic injustice under two scenarios: idea appropriation and bullshitting. Epistemic injustice happens when a speaker or writer suffers idea appropriation, where they are deprived of the credit and benefits of their cognitive labor, or when epistemic agents consume bullshit that exploits their limited access to the institutional resources required to interrogate and resist it, treating them as a mere means to an end, e.g., when a politician bullshits voters to secure their vote at election time. These unsavory practices are incentivized by reputational boosts and other social goods with the risk of reputational damage if detected. This paper ends by reviewing how widespread epistemic injustice hampers the epistemic marketplace.

Episteme
Arizona State University (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 4%
Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Unjust Aspects of the Epistemic Marketplace: Idea Appropriation, Bullshit, and Epistemic Injustice — Jimmy Alfonso Licon · Episteme (2026) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS