Scope of Epistemic Reparations

Mitova (2025) claims that certain epistemic wrongs are irreparable on dominant backward-looking accounts of epistemic reparations. I argue that this conclusion has not been successfully defended. The epistemic reparations framework is far more resilient than she acknowledges. Mitova’s case for irreparability rests on two assumptions: that only agents can undertake reparative action; and that recognition of epistemic wrongs must be granted to victims by the dominant. Neither assumption is justified. Non-agent groups can bear responsibility; and recognition is better understood as the withdrawal of denial, sustained by humility and open-mindedness. Once these are acknowledged, the alleged limits on epistemic reparations dissolve. The framework retains its reach across structural contexts, preserving the possibility of repair where epistemic injustice is most entrenched.