David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Hypatia 15 (1):151-174 (2000)
: Liberal philosopher James Mill has been understood as being unambiguously antifeminist. However, Terence Ball, supposedly informed by a feminist perspective, has argued for a new interpretation. Ball has reconceptualized Mill as a feminist and the sole source of the feminism of his son (J. S. Mill), suggesting a revision of the received wisdom about their relationship to the development of nineteenth century feminist thought. This paper takes issue with Ball's "new interpretation" and its presumed feminist basis
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
Judith Grant (1993). Fundamental Feminism: Contesting the Core Concepts of Feminist Theory. Routledge.
Mariana Szapuova (2006). Mill's Liberal Feminism: Its Legacy and Current Criticism. Prolegomena 5 (2):179-191.
Penelope Deutscher (2006). When Feminism is "High" and Ignorance is "Low": Harriet Taylor Mill on the Progress of the Species. Hypatia 21 (3):136-150.
John Skorupski (ed.) (1998). The Cambridge Companion to Mill. Cambridge University Press.
Valerie Bryson (2003). Feminist Political Theory: An Introduction. Palgrave Macmillan.
Imelda Whelehan (1995). Modern Feminist Thought: From the Second Wave to "Post-Feminism". New York University Press.
Karen J. Warren (1987). Feminism and Ecology: Making Connections. Environmental Ethics 9 (1):3-20.
Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads1 ( #306,230 of 1,088,905 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?