David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Hypatia 26 (2):333-351 (2011)
Helen Longino's account of objectivity has been highly regarded by both feminist and mainstream philosophers of science. However, I have encountered three feminist philosophers who have all offered one especially compelling feminist critique of Longino's view: far from vindicating or privileging the work of feminist scientists, Longino's account actually requires the active cultivation of anti-feminist and misogynist scientists to balance out the possibility of feminist bias. I call this objection the Nazi problem, for the particular version that claims that her view requires even the active cultivation of Nazi scientists in objective inquiry. In this paper I consider one response to the Nazi problem, which I call the good faith argument. I show that the good faith argument itself is just as objectionable, on feminist grounds, as the Nazi problem it is meant to address
|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
Justin B. Biddle (2009). Advocates or Unencumbered Selves? On the Role of Mill's Political Liberalism in Longino's Contextual Empiricism. Philosophy of Science 76 (5):612-623.
Miranda Fricker (2003). Epistemic Injustice and a Role for Virtue in the Politics of Knowing. Metaphilosophy 34 (1/2):154-173.
Kristen Intemann (2005). Feminism, Underdetermination, and Values in Science. Philosophy of Science 72 (5):1001-1012.
Janet A. Kourany (ed.) (1997). Philosophy in a Feminist Voice: Critiques and Reconstructions. Princeton University Press.
Helen Longino (2002). The Fate of Knowledge. Princeton University Press.
Citations of this work BETA
Kristen Intemann & Inmaculada de Melo-Martín (2014). Addressing Problems in Profit-Driven Research: How Can Feminist Conceptions of Objectivity Help? European Journal for Philosophy of Science 4 (2):135-151.
Similar books and articles
Margret Grebowicz (2005). Consensus, Dissensus, and Democracy: What Is at Stake in Feminist Science Studies? Philosophy of Science 72 (5):989-1000.
Martha McCaughey (1993). Redirecting Feminist Critiques of Science. Hypatia 8 (4):72 - 84.
Karyn L. Freedman (2009). Diversity and the Fate of Objectivity. Social Epistemology 23 (1):45-56.
Geoffrey Gorham (1995). The Concept of Truth in Feminist Sciences. Hypatia 10 (3):99 - 116.
Jane Duran (1998). Philosophies of Science/Feminist Theories. Westview Press.
Helen E. Longino (1987). Can There Be A Feminist Science? Hypatia 2 (3):51 - 64.
Sharon L. Crasnow (1993). Can Science Be Objective? Longino's Science as Social Knowledge. [REVIEW] Hypatia 8 (3):194-201.
Deborah K. Heikes (2004). The Bias Paradox: Why It's Not Just for Feminists Anymore. Synthese 138 (3):315 - 335.
Lisa Weasel (2001). Dismantling the Self/Other Dichotomy in Science: Towards a Feminist Model of the Immune System. Hypatia 16 (1):27-44.
Helen E. Longino (1997). Feminist Epistemology as a Local Epistemology: Helen E. Longino. Aristotelian Society Supplementary Volume 71 (1):19–36.
Philip Lewin (1984). IV. Longino and Heidegger on Objectivity. Inquiry 27 (1-4):145-148.
Nathan Nobis (2005). Feminist Ethics Without Feminist Ethical Theory (Or, More Generally, “Φ Ethics Without Φ Ethical Theory”). Journal of Philosophical Research 30 (Supplement):213-225.
Sharon Crasnow (2008). Feminist Philosophy of Science: 'Standpoint' and Knowledge. [REVIEW] Science and Education 17 (10):1089-1110.
Added to index2010-12-23
Total downloads86 ( #23,410 of 1,699,674 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #362,609 of 1,699,674 )
How can I increase my downloads?