Epistemic Justice: Believing the Harmed Person's Knowledge

Sor Juana's constant struggle involved being denied credibility: her intellectual claims were dismissed because she was a woman; her interpretations were overridden by male authorities; her knowledge of her own experience was subordinated to institutional doctrine. Miranda Fricker calls such silencing "epistemic injustice." Punitive systems perpetuate this: victims' accounts are filtered through lawyers and judges; their interpretation of harm's meaning is subordinated to legal definitions; their expertise about their own experience is marginalized. Restorative justice, informed by Sor Juana's fight for intellectual recognition, centers the harmed person as a knower. Their testimony about what happened, how it affected them, and what restoration requires carries epistemic authority. They are not merely witnesses in proceedings controlled by others; they are legitimate interpreters of their own experience. Communities practice epistemic justice by listening deeply, accepting the harmed person's framing of events, and treating their knowledge as valid. This doesn't mean victims always interpret every aspect correctly, but it means their direct knowledge of harm deserves foundational respect. Restorative processes restore epistemic standing that punitive systems destroy.