Notes on Historical Harm in Science, Epistemic Injustice, and Colonial Legacies

Historical harms in science: statistics, race, and eugenics

Francis Galton (often cited as a founder of statistics) popularized the idea that human abilities (e.g., intelligence) are distributed along a bell-shaped curve (a normal distribution).
He plotted different bell curves for different races, typically showing a higher end for the white race and lower ends for others, effectively dehumanizing groups by implying inherent differences in ability.
Carl Pearson also used ideas about racial differences in intelligence and used them as a foundation for eugenics, providing scientific backing for forced sterilization and racism.
Takeaway: these early uses of statistics framed human variation in hierarchical, dehumanizing terms and informed coercive policies.

Origins and evolution of epidemiology: roots in coercion and control

Some of the first epidemiologists are said to be British doctors aboard slave ships during the Transatlantic slave trade.
These ships were crowded, unsanitary, and deprived people of basic health rights; disease spread was rampant and controlled conditions allowed data collection and observation.
Skills central to epidemiology (data collection, observation, surveillance) were honed in this context under violent and coercive control.
Implication: epidemiology emerged not as a neutral enterprise but as a tool embedded in systems of control and oppression.

Epistemic injustice and epistemicide: how knowledge is silenced or erased

Epistemic injustice (coined by Miranda Fricker in 2007) refers to wrongs done to people as knowers or to entire knowledge communities.
Two main forms discussed:
- Testimonial injustice: a person is discredited as a knower due to bias. Example from lecture: a woman-identifying scientist being interrupted or dismissed in a boardroom; her knowledge is undervalued.
- Hermeneutical injustice (the transcript mentions a term that appears as COLI): a lack of shared concepts or vocabulary to describe a situation, making it hard for affected people to articulate experiences (e.g., environmental racism) until the language becomes widely recognized.
Epistemicide: the intentional destruction of a knowledge system and people’s ability to share that knowledge on their terms.
- Example: Indigenous knowledge systems about land, ecology, and medicinal plants were suppressed through colonial processes, including residential schools that banned languages and traditional teachings.
Impact: epistemic injustices persist in how knowledge is valued, who is asked to speak, and what readings or curricula are prioritized in education.

Indigenous knowledge, colonial suppression, and ongoing effects

Indigenous knowledge about land, ecology, and medicinal plants was historically dismissed as myth or non-science by colonial powers.
Modern scientists sometimes validate these Indigenous insights only after rediscovering them, often without adequately crediting Indigenous communities.
Call to action: engage in self-directed research about Indigenous peoples in your region; use resources like nativeland.ca to understand who lived on the land and what knowledge they possess.
Residential schools: used to criminalize Indigenous languages and traditional teaching, contributing to epistemic violence and long-term cultural disruption.
Ongoing effects: colonial histories shape who is taught, which readings are used in schools, and who holds power in institutions and governance.

Global patterns of access: the World North/South and income classifications

The world is often visualized with a contrast between the Global North (wealthier, higher mobility) and the Global South (poorer, fewer resources).
This framing helps illuminate patterns of access to resources and education, but the language of geography and wealth can reinforce hierarchies if not used carefully.
The World Bank’s income classifications (low, middle, high) provide a more data-driven way to discuss economic factors, but they also reflect geopolitical and historical power dynamics.
The lecture uses a visual prototype (the world map) to help think about who has access to education, Internet, patents, and other resources that enable scientific work.
A common reaction highlighted: “the postal code determines life expectancy,” illustrating deep health disparities even within a single country (e.g., Indigenous communities in the North vs overall national averages).

Language and terminology: avoiding colonial frames

Language inherited from colonial times can perpetuate hierarchies; it’s important to use terms that do not reinforce old power structures.
Instead of First World/Third World, use Global North/Global South.
Instead of Developed/Developing, use Low Income / Middle Income / High Income (as classified by economic metrics).
Language choices shape how we think about the world and whom we consider as capable contributors to science.

Barriers to science: who gets to participate and be heard

Even within Global North contexts, historically marginalized groups (by race, gender, Indigenous status, etc.) face barriers to education, funding, and professorship.
Barriers are often embedded in hiring practices, research funding, and admissions; geopolitics and trade relationships can influence who has access to resources.
The phenomenon is not just historical: it continues to shape whose work is funded, published, and cited.
The lecture emphasizes reflecting on who has been left out of science and how those exclusions echo in today’s fields.

A related human story: the Holocaust survivor as a scientist

A Jewish psychiatrist who survived the Holocaust is mentioned: his experiences as a scientist under extreme oppression influenced his memoirs and how he describes the practice of science under coercive conditions.
This anecdote underscores that science can operate within oppressive systems and raises questions about ethics, recognition, and the boundaries of scientific inquiry under duress.

Practical takeaways: connecting history to current practice

Ethical reflection: be mindful of how knowledge is produced, who is included, and what vocabularies we use to describe social phenomena.
Credit and acknowledgment: ensure Indigenous and other marginalized knowledge holders receive proper credit and control over their knowledge systems.
Equity in science: actively consider access to education, funding, and opportunity; challenge gatekeeping in academia and research.
Language as policy: adopt inclusive terminology to avoid reproducing colonial hierarchies in everyday scientific communication.

Core concepts and formulas to remember

Normal distribution (bell curve) as a model for biological/psychometric traits:
f(x) = rac{1}{ au \, \sqrt{2\pi}} \, e^{-rac{(x-\mu)^2}{2\tau^2}}
where \mu is the mean and \tau (or \sigma) is the standard deviation.
Epistemic injustice (Fricker, 2007): injustices related to knowledge and knowers; involves both testimonial and hermeneutical dimensions.
Epistemicide: systematic destruction of knowledge systems and languages, often via colonial or institutional means.

Suggested reflection prompts (exam-style)

How did early statistical thinking contribute to harmful racial hierarchies, and what safeguards should be in place to prevent such misuse?
In what ways did the origins of epidemiology on slave ships influence the field’s development, and how should this history shape current practice?
Define testimonial injustice and hermeneutical injustice with examples from modern science. How can researchers mitigate these injustices in their work?
What is epistemicide, and how did residential schools illustrate this concept? Discuss contemporary strategies to support Indigenous knowledge systems.
Explain Global North vs Global South terminology and why alternative language (low/middle/high income) might be preferred in scientific discourse. Discuss potential pitfalls of rebranding without addressing underlying inequities.
Reflect on how colonial legacies influence who has access to education, funding, and positions in science today. What concrete steps can students and institutions take to promote inclusion?

Resources mentioned in the transcript

nativeland.ca: a resource to learn which Indigenous nations lived on the land where you are or where you study, and to learn about their knowledge and history.
Historical readings on Francis Galton and Carl Pearson (pioneers of statistics and eugenics).
Miranda Fricker (2007) on epistemic injustice (coining and defining testimonial and hermeneutical injustice).
General discussions of colonization, Indigenous knowledge, and residential schools and their epistemic impact.