Cancel culture, discourse and epistemic progress

Abstract

Cancel culture is an emerging phenomenon in the online space. Defenders argue that cancel culture is a tool for empowerment while critics argue that cancel culture is a form of unjust punishment that causes harm to innocent individuals across business, economy, politics and media. The effect of cancel culture is increasingly observed in academia, where scholars have been observed to feel pressured to conform to majority’s views. The “spiral of silence” theory is used to explain the consequences when cancel culture implores self-censorship within the academia. When self-censorship occurs, discourse becomes limited and decreases in quality. This impacts knowledge and epistemic progress. Noting the possible repercussions of cancel culture on discourse, I set out to explore and assess whether cancel culture poses an epistemic threat by hindering epistemic progress. The construct of epistemic progress by Clinton Golding is used in this assessment. I conclude that cancel culture may not pose an epistemic threat as it meets several criteria required of epistemic progress.