ABSTRACT
This chapter contains a very brief introduction to an epistemic injustice, followed by an example. It is followed by a short discussion and then a series of questions. The example is an exercise in thought. People can agree that prejudice and bias against particular groups of people are bad. The chapter presents a case study of what Miranda Fricker describes as epistemically unjust. The case study is what she describes as identity-prejudicial credibility deficit. The questions discussed in the chapter are intended to get the philosophy students thinking about the problems. They have used these kinds of questions in seminars as the questions set for seminars, so they also think that they can be used to spark conversation and discussion. The chapter also gives a cursory sketch of some of the ways in which philosophers have responded to the thought experiment.
