Feminism, Adaptive Preferences, and Social Contract Theory

Hypatia 30 (4):829-845 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Feminists have long been aware of the pathology and the dangers of what are now termed “adaptive preferences.” Adaptive preferences are preferences formed in unconscious response to oppression. Thinkers from each wave of feminism continue to confront the problem of women's internalization of their own oppression, that is, the problem of women forming their preferences within the confining and deforming space that patriarchy provides. All preferences are, in fact, formed in response to a limited set of options, but not all preferences are unconscious, pathological responses to oppression. Feminist theory therefore requires a method for distinguishing all preferences from adaptive or deformed preferences. Social contract theory provides such a tool. Social contract theory models autonomous preference-acquisition and retention at both the external level of causation and the internal level of justification. In doing so, social contract theory exposes preferences that do not meet those standards, acting as both a conceptual test that identifies adaptive preferences and as a practical tool for personal and social clarification. A social contract approach helps persons and societies to identify and to confront preferences rooted in unconscious response to oppression

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,202

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

In defense of adaptive preferences.Donald W. Bruckner - 2009 - Philosophical Studies 142 (3):307 - 324.
Adaptive Preferences and the Hellenistic Insight.Hugh Breakey - 2010 - Australian Journal of Professional and Applied Ethics 12 (1):29-39.
Must Theorising about Adaptive Preferences Deny Women's Agency?Serene J. Khader - 2012 - Journal of Applied Philosophy 29 (4):302-317.
Preferences over consumption and status.Alexander Vostroknutov - 2013 - Theory and Decision 74 (4):509-537.
The perfectionism of Nussbaum's adaptive preferences.Rosa Terlazzo - 2014 - Journal of Global Ethics 10 (2):183-198.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-07-01

Downloads
99 (#169,049)

6 months
16 (#136,207)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

References found in this work

Justice as fairness: a restatement.John Rawls (ed.) - 2001 - Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
Sour grapes: studies in the subversion of rationality.Jon Elster - 1983 - Paris: Editions de la Maison des sciences de l'homme.
Justice as Fairness: A Restatement.C. L. Ten - 2003 - Mind 112 (447):563-566.
Justice: What's the Right Thing to Do?Michael J. Sandel (ed.) - 2009 - New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.

View all 26 references / Add more references