Perspectives on Science 16 (3):pp. 285-302 (2008)
AbstractWe can understand objectivity, in the broadest sense of the term, as epistemic accountability to the real. Since at least the 1986 publication of Sandra Harding’s The Science Question in Feminism, so-called standpoint epistemologists have sought to build an understanding of such objectivity that does not essentially anchor it to a dislocated, ‘view from nowhere’ stance on the part of the judging subject. Instead, these theorists have argued that a proper understanding of objectivity must recognize that different agential standpoints offer different access to objective truths, with some standpoints holding better epistemic potential than others. As Harding puts it, standpoint epistemology calls for “a critical evaluation of which social situations tend to generate the most objective knowledge claims” so as to identify those standpoints that “produce empirically more accurate descriptions and theoretically richer explanations” (1991, 142, 149). Which standpoints enable the most objectivity with respect to a particular inquiry is, for the standpoint theorists, always an empirical at least as much as a conceptual question; it requires attention to the actual, material relationship between knowers, knowledge practices, and objects known. Standpoint epistemology was developed primarily by self-identiªed feminist epistemologists. Virtually all developments of standpoint episte-.
Added to PP
Historical graph of downloads
References found in this work
Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning.Karen Barad - 2007 - Duke University Press.
Representing and Intervening.Ian Hacking - 1984 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 35 (4):381-390.
Why Standpoint Matters.Alison Wylie - 2003 - In Robert Figueroa & Sandra G. Harding (eds.), Science and Other Cultures: Issues in Philosophies of Science and Technology. Routledge. pp. 26--48.
Citations of this work
Towards Democratic Models of Science: Exploring the Case of Scientific Pluralism.Jeroen Van Bouwel - 2015 - Perspectives on Science 23 (2):149-172.
Epistemological Misgivings of Karen Barad’s ‘Posthumanism’.Chris Calvert-Minor - 2014 - Human Studies 37 (1):123-137.
The Context Distinction: Controversies Over Feminist Philosophy of Science.Monica Aufrecht - 2011 - European Journal for Philosophy of Science 1 (3):373-392.
Commentary on The Emotional Life of Reason: Exploring Conceptions of Objectivity.Moira Howes - unknown
The Emotional Life of Reason: Exploring Conceptions of Objectivity.C. Pinto Robert & E. Pinto Laura - unknown
Similar books and articles
Challenging Academic Norms: An Epistemology for Feminist and Multicultural Classrooms.Shari Stone-Mediatore - 2007 - National Women's Studies Association Journal 19 (2):55-78.
“Strong Objectivity‘: A Response to the New Objectivity Question.Sandra Harding - 1995 - Synthese 104 (3):331 - 349.
From Aperspectival Objectivity to Strong Objectivity: The Quest for Moral Objectivity.Jennifer Tannoch-Bland - 1997 - Hypatia 12 (1):155 - 178.
Objectivity and Perspective in Empirical Knowledge.Rebecca Kukla - 2006 - Episteme 3 (1-2):80-95.