Justified Epistemic Exclusions in Mathematics.

This article examines justified forms of epistemic exclusion within mathematical knowledge production, focusing on the phenomenon of so-called "cranks"—outsiders who communicate mathematical arguments to the community but whose work is filtered out primarily for workload-management reasons rather than solely for incorrectness. It argues that mathematicians employ markers-of-competence filters to quickly assess outsider contributions, which justifiably exclude many works without detailed engagement, even when some correct arguments may be mistakenly filtered out. The paper distinguishes between the manifest concept of a crank—as a stubborn, epistemically inadequate archetype—and the operative concept used in practice, which relies on features of the work rather than the author's character, highlighting an ethical disconnect in labeling. Overall, the study contends that such workload-driven filtering constitutes a justified epistemic exclusion, though it raises concerns about the fairness and pejorative use of the "crank" label.