October 15 Discussion Post

Uma Narayan talks about 'methodological humility' and 'methodological action' on behalf of outsiders in better understanding the insider's experience. However, she also argues that "...the claim to epistemic privilege for the oppressed should not be identified with the claim that the oppressed should speak for themselves and represent their own interests. That the oppressed should speak for themselves may be a thesis to which we may have a moral and political commitment quite regardless of the view that the oppressed have epistemic privilege" (38). Do you agree with Narayan on this point? Can outsiders ever properly represent or speak on behalf of the insider experience, while keeping in mind both precautions mentioned above? Contrary to Narayan's argument, should the claim to epistemic privilege of the oppressed be the prerequisite to the authority to speak for themselves and represent their experiences?