In Michael Bruce & Steven Barbone (eds.), Just the Arguments: 100 of the Most Important Arguments in Western Philosophy. Wiley-Blackwell (2011)

Authors
Deborah Heikes
University of Alabama, Huntsville
Abstract
Feminist philosophers are often concerned with rejecting Cartesian notions of objectivity which eliminate all subjectivity on the part of knowers. However, this rejection of a notion of pure (non-subjective) neutrality has led the dilemma that Louise Antony calls the “bias paradox” (Antony 1993, 188-90). At the heart of this paradox lies the seeming choice between objectivism and relativism. It has two fundamental commitments that clearly focus this dilemma: (1) the explicit rejection of the concept of impartial objectivity and (2) the desire to assert the reality of women’s oppression. The problem is that in the absence of impartiality (at least as an ideal), there appears to be a lack of principled, normative criteria for evaluating beliefs across differing epistemic perspectives. While this tension is dealt with most straightforwardly in discussions of naturalized feminist epistemology and feminist philosophy of science, the bias paradox, nonetheless, is not merely a problem for feminists. Any view that rejects the Cartesian ideals of pure objectivity and value-neutrality will ultimately be forced to confront the dilemma that seemingly results from the paradox; namely, to either endorse pure impartiality or accept an “anything goes” relativism.
Keywords feminism  epistemology
Categories (categorize this paper)
Buy the book Find it on Amazon.com
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 62,513
External links

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.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The “Bias” Bias in Social Psychology: Adaptive When and How?James Friedrich - 2004 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 27 (3):335-336.
Two Grades of Evidential Bias.Paul M. Churchland - 1975 - Philosophy of Science 42 (3):250-259.
Exploring Social Desirability Bias.Janne Chung & Gary S. Monroe - 2003 - Journal of Business Ethics 44 (4):291 - 302.
Understanding Bias in Scientific Practice.Nancy E. Shaffer - 1996 - Philosophy of Science 63 (3):97.
Bias in Peer Review.Carole J. Lee, Cassidy R. Sugimoto, Guo Zhang & Blaise Cronin - 2013 - Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 64 (1):2-17.
Preferences, Welfare, and the Status-Quo Bias.Dale Dorsey - 2010 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 88 (3):535-554.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2012-04-25

Total views
22 ( #491,145 of 2,446,439 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #456,608 of 2,446,439 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes