The main thread connecting these areas of my research is my interest in theories of discourse (i.e., theories about which forms of discourse improve the results of agents' moral, political, and scientific inquiries). Thus, my research emphasizes the importance of answering the questions: 1) What forms of discourse would improve the functioning of democracy within diverse societies? 2) What forms of discourse can ameliorate the harmful effects of problematic assumptions within scientific research? 3) What forms of discourse are capable of reducing the occurrences of epistemic injustice?

 

In my dissertation, I argue that agents' responsiveness to the claims that others raise in discourse – and, particularly, responsiveness to the claims of those who hold viewpoints that significantly diverge from one's own – is a crucial part of what justifies the conclusions that agents reach through inquiry. I further claim that members of marginalized social groups often face significant social pressures to be responsive to the worldviews of  privileged social groups and that this additional responsiveness within discourse is capable of explaining the kinds of epistemic advantages that are so often present in the standpoints of oppressed members of society. Moreover, I analyze – and seek to improve – the ways that agents go about familiarizing themselves with a variety of different worldviews. To do so, I draw upon the strategies developed by agents living at the intersection of multiple oppressions who have been particularly successful at bringing different worldviews into critical interaction with one another.

 

I am also currently working on projects that use this account of the role of discourse in inquiry to evaluate the ethical use of AI technologies. In this work, I emphasize the importance of empathy within critical reasoning and the need for AI systems to be appropriately responsive to the dissenting opinions that have been raised by those who belong to marginalized social groups.