Michael Scott and Standpoint Epistemology

In this video, Michael Scott reveals his utter ignorance about the structure of the social
world in a diversity training in The Office’s second episode, “Diversity Day.” Michael
Scott in the clip demonstrates a structural blindness to why his actions are offensive. A
blindness which can be explained through Standpoint Epistemology.

Standpoint Epistemology explores the interplay between one’s social status and one’s epistemic situation. One of the central claims of most or all standpoint epistemologists is that the experiences of those who are marginalized in various ways within a particular social structure are a clearer window onto facts about that social structure and the power dynamics that characterize it than are the experiences of the privileged. A corollary of this claim that is often affirmed within standpoint theory is that the more privileged one is in a social structure, the less one’s experiences reveal about that social structure and the power dynamics that characterize it.

Privilege tends to come with a sort of epistemic blindness owing most centrally to the fact that it is the privileged that are invested in the status quo, while the marginalized are not so invested.

The movement finds its origin in Marx’s social epistemology. According to Marx, the bourgeoisie lack knowledge of how the social-economic system truly operates, while the proletariat have an often all-too-intimate understanding of the same. In my Intro to Philosophy course, we read and discuss Tanesini’s “The Importance of Standpoint in Feminism.”

One way to explore standpoint epistemology is to look at the epistemological blindness exhibited by the paradigm of a man of privilege. Michael Scott from The Office is a good example of this. I chose a clip from episode two of the first season of The Office, “Diversity Day.” In the episode, Larry Wilmore appears as a diversity trainer, expertly playing the comedic foil to Michael Scott’s overtly offensive and otherwise pushy and controlling behavior.

Michael repeatedly attempts to assert his leadership even in a moment where he clearly has no expertise to offer—neither does he have any constructive ideas about how to spend the time. One imagines Michael being pushed to the center of attention throughout his privileged existence and as a result being unable to grasp something obvious to everyone else in the room: he has nothing to offer (at the very least when it comes to diversity training). Michael doesn’t understand what is offensive, what is acceptable, what is harmful, and how his actions affect other people—in short, he doesn’t understand the structure of the social world. A standpoint epistemologist would predict such an outcome given Michael’s privileged life.

The clip also demonstrates how one’s situated position can close one off to certain types of explanations or types of knowledge. This clip is a good example of the ignorance systematically generated by privilege. This video is also helpful in discussing how such ignorance systemically reinforces itself through the shared limited experiences of those who are not marginalized. For example, Dwight Schrute’s interaction with Michael Scott normalizes his offensive behavior in the clip. This is an example of how those with privilege reaffirm the epistemic blindness of others with privilege.

I like to teach Standpoint Epistemology after I teach skepticism in the form of Al-Ghazali and Descartes. The skepticism unit gives my intro students a sense of what epistemology is, and then Tanesini’s article gives them a sense of where epistemology might develop as it intersects with frameworks like feminism.

When I show this video, I split my students into small groups of 2-3 and ask them to discuss the ways in which Michael Scott’s behavior illustrates standpoint epistemology as they understand it from the reading and basic introduction I’ve given them in the preceding few minutes. We then discuss as a large group and develop a list of different sorts of ignorance that go along with privilege. Finally, I bring in themes from the reading to dive deeper on the subject. Students love the show and as a result this gives them a sense of ownership of the philosophical ideas. They seem to remember this class session more than those I teach without a memorable video clip or cultural reference.

Possible Readings:

Tanesini, Alessandra, “The Importance of Standpoint in Feminism,” Voices of Wisdom, Gary Kessler, ed., Wadsworth, 8 th edition, 2013, 374-387. (Originally from Tanesini’s An Introduction to Feminist Epistemologies, 1999, Blackwell.)

Sources and other resources:

Harding, Sandra. “Introduction: Standpoint Theory as a Site of Political, Philosophic, and Scientific Debate” in The Feminist Standpoint Theory Reader: Intellectual and Political Controversies. Sandra Harding ed., New York: Routledge, 2004, 1-16.

Collins, Patricia Hill. “Learning from the Outsider Within: The Sociological Significance of Black Feminist Thought” Social Problems 33, no. 6 (1986):14-32.

Bowell, T. “Feminist Standpoint Theory“. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Accessed January 19th, 2020

This section of the Blog of APA is designed to share pedagogical approaches to using humorous video clips for teaching philosophy. Humor, when used appropriately, has empirically been shown to correlate with higher retention rates. If you are interested in contributing to this series, please email the Series Editor, William A. B. Parkhurst, at parkhurst1@usf.edu.

Andrew Lavin

Andrew Lavin earned his PhD from UCLA in 2019. He is now a lecturer at three
schools near Chico, CA: Butte College, Feather River College, and California State
University, Chico.