Emotions have long been of interest to philosophers and have deep historical roots going back to the Ancients. They have also become one of the most exciting areas of current research in philosophy, the cognitive sciences, and beyond. -/- This book explains the philosophy of the emotions, structuring the investigation around seven fundamental questions: What are emotions? Are emotions natural kinds? Do animals have emotions? Are emotions epistemically valuable? Are emotions the foundation for value and morality? Are emotions the basis (...) for responsibility? Do emotions make us better people? -/- In the course of exploring these questions, the book also discusses cutting-edge empirical research on emotion, feminist approaches to emotions and their value, and methodological questions on how to theorize about the emotions. The book also contains in-depth discussions of specific emotions like compassion, disgust, anxiety, and curiosity. It also highlights emerging trends in emotion research. (shrink)

This paper offers an analysis of the primary wrong of epistemic injustice, namely, of the intrinsic harm that constitutes its action itself. Contrary to Miranda Fricker, I shall argue that there is...

A growing body of work argues that we should reform problematic emotions like anxiety, anger, and shame: doing this will allow us to better harness the contributions that these emotions can make to our agency and wellbeing. But feminist philosophers worry that prescriptions to correct these inappropriate emotions will only further marginalize women, minorities, and other members of subordinated groups. While much in these debates turns on empirical questions about how we can change problematic emotion norms for the better, to (...) date, little has been done by either side to assess how we might do this, much less in ways that are responsive to the feminists’ worries. Drawing on research in cognitive science, this paper argues that though the feminists’ worries are real, the leading proposals for remedying them are inadequate. It then develops an alternative strategy for reshaping problematic emotion norms—one that’s sensitive to the feminists’ concerns. (shrink)

En este artículo nos centramos en la consideración de las injusticias epistémicas como emociones público-privadas para enfrentar la injusticia epistémica estructural. Partimos de la propuesta de Judith Shklar, quien critica a la concepción tradicional centrada en la justicia que entiende a las injusticias como una falla del modelo. En esta línea, revisamos la propuesta de Miranda Fricker sobre la injusticia epistémica como injusticia estructural, conceptualización que complejizamos a partir de los aportes de Sally Haslanger. Luego, a partir del planteo de (...) Sarah Ahmed, nos centramos en la dimensión social y a la vez individual de las emociones, entendidas como prácticas sociales y culturales. Desde este abordaje, destacamos el valor epistémico de las emociones socialmente valoradas como negativas, cuyo saber ha sido infravalorado a lo largo de la historia por la epistemología tradicional. En este sentido es que entendemos a la injusticia epistémica como emoción público-privada. Para finalizar, sumamos a este enfoque la propuesta de las estructuras del sentir de Raymond Williams, para profundizar en el análisis de la injusticia epistémica estructural desde esta propuesta entendiendo a las injusticias epistémicas como emociones público-privadas que emergen como sentir epocal. (shrink)

Outlaw emotions are emotions that stand in tension with one’s wider belief system, often allowing epistemic insight one may have otherwise lacked. Outlaw emotions are thought to play crucial epistemic roles under conditions of oppression. Although the crucial epistemic value of these emotions is widely acknowledged, specific accounts of their epistemic role(s) remain largely programmatic. There are two dominant accounts of the epistemic role of emotions: The Motivational View and the Justificatory View. Philosophers of emotion assume that these dominant ways (...) of accounting for the epistemic role(s) of emotions in general are equipped to account for the epistemic role(s) of outlaw emotions. I argue that this is not the case. I consider and dismiss two responses that could be made on behalf of the most promising account, the Justificatory View, in light of my argument, before sketching an alternative account that should be favoured. (shrink)