Abstract

There seems to be a common timeline when identifying cases of hermeneutical injustice: first, we detect a failure in (dominant collective) conceptual resources; second, we work on some sort of conceptual landscaping to repair the failure and improve resources. I articulate two reasons why we need to expand this sort of conceptual work beyond failure detection and reparation. First, in relation to hermeneutical injustice specifically, cases of interest for a justice- motivated conceptual landscaping do not necessarily involve the discovery of failures in existing dominant collective resources. Second, limiting conceptual landscaping to fixing detected failures only allows add-ons and adjustments in existing resources, preventing radical creativity in our conceptual work. After introducing these two reasons, I propose what a more expansive way of doing conceptual landscaping might look like, using as an illustration the case of genderopen children. Finally, I articulate a caution when expanding conceptual landscaping beyond failure detection and reparation.