David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Ezio Di Nucci
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Philosophy of Science 72 (5):989-1000 (2005)
If feminists argue for the irreducibility of the social dimensions of science, then they ought to embrace the idea that feminist and non-feminist scientists are not in collaboration, but in fact defend different interests. Instead, however, contemporary feminist science studies literature argues that feminist research improves particular, existing scientific enterprises, both epistemically (truer claims) and politically (more democratic methodologies and applications). I argue that the concepts of empirical success and democracy at work in this literature from Longino (1994) and Harding (1996), to Longino (2002), Gilbert and Rader (2001), and Keller (2001) are not sufficiently critical, and fail to do justice to the truly revolutionary work done by feminist scientists. I offer the beginnings of an epistemology of dissensus (as opposed to consensus), using the work of Haraway (1978), Lyotard (1984), and Ziarek (2001). How would such an epistemology relate to feminist discussions of the possibility of democratic, responsible knowledge?
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Erik L. Peterson (2008). William Bateson From "Balanoglossus" to "Materials for the Study of Variation": The Transatlantic Roots of Discontinuity and the (Un)Naturalness of Selection. [REVIEW] Journal of the History of Biology 41 (2):267 - 305.
Erik L. Peterson (2008). William Bateson From Balanoglossus to Materials for the Study of Variation: The Transatlantic Roots of Discontinuity and the Naturalness of Selection. Journal of the History of Biology 41 (2):267-305.
Similar books and articles
Cynthia Kraus (2012). Linking Neuroscience, Medicine, Gender and Society Through Controversy and Conflict Analysis : A "Dissensus Framework" for Feminist/Queer Brain Science Studies. In Robyn Bluhm, Anne Jaap Jacobson & Heidi Lene Maibom (eds.), Neurofeminism: Issues at the Intersection of Feminist Theory and Cognitive Science. Palgrave Macmillan
Jane Duran (1998). Philosophies of Science/Feminist Theories. Westview Press.
Lisa Weasel (2001). Dismantling the Self/Other Dichotomy in Science: Towards a Feminist Model of the Immune System. Hypatia 16 (1):27-44.
Daniel Hicks (2011). Is Longino's Conception of Objectivity Feminist? Hypatia 26 (2):333-351.
Sharyn Clough (2004). Having It All: Naturalized Normativity in Feminist Science Studies. Hypatia 19 (1):102-118.
Cassandra L. Pinnick (1994). Feminist Epistemology: Implications for Philosophy of Science. Philosophy of Science 61 (4):646-657.
Sue V. Rosser (1987). Feminist Scholarship in the Sciences: Where Are We Now and When Can We Expect A Theoretical Breakthrough? Hypatia 2 (3):5 - 17.
Sharon Crasnow (2008). Feminist Philosophy of Science: 'Standpoint' and Knowledge. [REVIEW] Science and Education 17 (10):1089-1110.
Linda Alcoff (1987). Justifying Feminist Social Science. Hypatia 2 (3):107 - 127.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads34 ( #117,067 of 1,796,170 )
Recent downloads (6 months)6 ( #138,417 of 1,796,170 )
How can I increase my downloads?