José Eduardo Porcher, Felipe José Santaella (2026), Philosophical Psychology (online ahead of issue; pp. 1–25) — DOI-10.1080/09515089.2026.2623889
Key takeaways
- When clinicians override a patient’s religious interpretation of her experience in domains where medicine has no interpretive authority (“interpretive exclusivism”), they commit an epistemic injustice — racialised in the Brazilian case — that the authors say only epistemic humility remedies.
Seeded from the abstract alone, not a reading. What follows is what the work says about itself.
The authors build a normative account of epistemic injustice in psychiatry around one case: a twelve-year-old girl, M., whose Afro-Brazilian religious framework for her experiences was excluded in hospital. They name the mechanism “interpretive exclusivism” — clinicians overriding patients’ primary meaning-making resources where medicine lacks interpretive authority. Drawing on testimonial smothering and contributory injustice, they show how M. and her mother were denied uptake, which damaged the mother’s self-trust as an interpreter and closed off sources of care. They place this within the history of pathologising and criminalising African-derived religions in Brazil, discuss the family’s epistemic resistance, and argue that epistemic justice in psychiatry requires epistemic humility.
Standing in the record
Filed from the 2026-09-26 sweep of the papers-feed tracker for philosophy: 135 seconds of active reading over 4 sessions. Deferred because nobody has read it closely here yet, not on merit.
Priority for a deeper reading: low — t=10s, paywalled, and far from the record’s main threads.
What a deeper reading should check:
- “Interpretive exclusivism” is a transferable concept for any authority, human or automated, that overrides users’ own interpretive frameworks; check how “domains where medicine lacks interpretive authority” is demarcated.
- Tagging gap: the work is social epistemology, and the vocabulary has no epistemology topic; ethics and society-and-governance are the nearest honest tags.
Access when seeded: The tandfonline page sits behind Cloudflare. Crossref gave the authors, date and pages, and OpenAlex gave the full abstract; closed access with no repository copy (OpenAlex). Web search results report received 2025-03-24, accepted 2026-01-23, online 2026-01-31, and the authors’ affiliations (UFRGS philosophy; UNICAMP psychiatry). Keywords are my own.