Neuroethics 5 (3):217-230 (2012)
This paper examines how the new field of neuroethics is responding to the old problem of difference, particularly to those ideas of biological difference emerging from neuroimaging research that purports to further delineate our understanding of sex and/or gender differences in the brain. As the field develops, it is important to ask what is new about neuroethics compared to bioethics in this regard, and whether the concept of difference is being problematized within broader contexts of power and representation. As a feminist science studies scholar trained in the neurosciences, it seems logical to me that, as a growing field, neuroethics should reach out to the rich bodies of scholarship on the history of medicine, feminist theory and feminist bioethics while attempting to approach discussions of sex, gender and sexuality differences in the brain. What is also clear to me is that feminist scholars need to learn how to engage with neuroimaging studies on sex, gender and sexuality not just to critique, but also to productively contribute to neuroscientific research. The field of neuroethics can potentially provide the appropriate forum for this interdisciplinary engagement and create opportunities for shared perplexity. I suggest three possible points of departure for creating this shared perplexity, namely (i) is difference being measured in the study for the purpose of understanding difference in and of itself, or for the purpose of division?; (ii) is there an appreciation for biological complexity?; and (iii) is it assumed that structural differences can be conveniently translated into functional differences?
|Keywords||Sex Gender Difference Neuroimaging Ontology Epistemology Materiality Feminist theory Feminist ethics Feminist science studies|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
Meeting the Universe Halfway: Quantum Physics and the Entanglement of Matter and Meaning.Karen Michelle Barad - 2007 - Duke University Press.
Sexing the Body: Gender Politics and the Construction of Sexuality.Anne Fausto-Sterling & Edward Stein - 2004 - Hypatia 19 (3):203-208.
Modest₋Witness@Second₋Millennium.Femaleman₋Meets₋Oncomouse: Feminism and Technoscience.Donna Jeanne Haraway - 1997 - Routledge.
Citations of this work BETA
Recommendations for Sex/Gender Neuroimaging Research: Key Principles and Implications for Research Design, Analysis, and Interpretation.Gina Rippon, Rebecca Jordan-Young, Anelis Kaiser & Cordelia Fine - 2014 - Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 8.
Scientific Reforms, Feminist Interventions, and the Politics of Knowing: An Auto‐Ethnography of a Feminist Neuroscientist.Sara Giordano - 2014 - Hypatia 29 (4):755-773.
Similar books and articles
Towards Diffractive Transdisciplinarity: Integrating Gender Knowledge Into the Practice of Neuroscientific Research.Katrin Nikoleyczik - 2012 - Neuroethics 5 (3):231-245.
Asymmetrical Genders: Phenomenological Reflections on Sexual Difference.Silvia Stoller & tr Nielsen, Camilla - 2005 - Hypatia 20 (2):7-26.
Nomadic Subjects: Embodiment and Sexual Difference in Contemporary Feminist Theory.Rosi Braidotti - 2011 - Columbia University Press.
Reading Transgender, Rethinking Women's Studies.Cressida J. Heyes - 2000 - National Women's Studies Association Journal 12 (2):170-180.
The New Men's Studies: From Feminist Theory to Gender Scholarship.Harry Brod - 1987 - Hypatia 2 (1):179 - 196.
Beyond Equality and Difference: Citizenship, Feminist Politics, and Female Subjectivity.Gisela Bock & Susan James (eds.) - 1992 - Routledge.
Luce Irigaray and the Philosophy of Sexual Difference.Alison Stone - 2006 - Cambridge University Press.
Added to index2011-06-20
Total downloads50 ( #101,858 of 2,153,830 )
Recent downloads (6 months)2 ( #279,963 of 2,153,830 )
How can I increase my downloads?