Abstract

This chapter contains two more arguments against pessimism about moral testimony. First, it argues that epistemic justice sometimes requires you to accept moral testimony, despite the fact that doing so seems to clash with autonomy. Both good and bad experiences teach a person what matters, and how much things matter. Those who systematically suffer have moral knowledge that others tend to lack, and whose testimony is routinely dismissed. Epistemic justice demands that we trust their moral testimony. Second, this chapter argues that prioritizing individual autonomy is in tension with another plausible claim: that epistemic solidarity is an important good. When you accept moral testimony, you and the speaker may thereby benefit from the epistemic solidarity that the two of you now stand together in, and that this epistemic solidarity is a moral good, a good you would forego by declining moral testimony on the grounds that to do so would compromise your own autonomy.