Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • The Science Question in Feminism

    Uploaded by

    Jack Daw
    17 views42 pages
    1986. The science question in feminism - Sandra Harding

    Original Title

    The science question in feminism

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PDF or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Report this Document
    1986. The science question in feminism - Sandra Harding

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    17 views42 pages

    The Science Question in Feminism

    Uploaded by

    Jack Daw
    1986. The science question in feminism - Sandra Harding

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PDF or read online from Scribd
    Flag for inappropriate content
    of 42
    ‘The Science Question in Feminism SANDRA HARDING Cornell University Press ITHACA AND LONDON gos ee Hebe copyrige © 1986 by Cal Uaieity _ exons seve hs ok prs 1 ihe ed a my Rew ree a ny os 4 Re Pa ‘peal Poirot (th, New Werk 50, x pe 14 Cora User Fee he Und Sine of Ameen ok cis ad ma pitino Ta ay of tn Cm rain Cine Fe par engray o C r Ree ite of mrs Caine Paina Du ‘asin, San +The Sac quo in ii sutopey ake en Wo ‘scence, 2. Feminism. 3. Science— soll Stem 1 Te Se go st MIT ec ts Rancarens!- oo) CONTENTS Acknowledgments Preface From the Woman Question in Science to the ‘Science Question in Feminism Gender and Science: Two Problematic Concepts “The Social Structure of Science: Complaints tnd Disorders Androcentrism in Biology and Social Science ‘Natural Resources: Gaining Moral Approval for ‘Sientiie Genders and Genderized Sciences From Feminist Empiricism to Feminist ‘Standpoint Epstemologies Other “Others” and Fractured Identities eves for Epistemolgiss LnwerorTy UBRARES CARNEGIE MELLON URIVERSITY 30 58 2 m 6 1 Coots ine Birth of Modern Seicnee” as 4 Text nate and External Stores ” 9 Problems with Post Kubrian Stories 216 ee eke eee biography as Index 63 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS “This book could not have been written without the inspiration and oppor of many inva andinstiations, Tam expeily indeed cay to gain scenic eloations—and enabled llc begin 0 roa anh why that ean be only the beginning ofthe feminist revo- Tution i sence. ine Taviable College of feminist theorists and science erties wine eilian and risk-taking work bas provided me with exemplary ace ae feminist theory. For invaluable comments on my ape, farts of ear versions of his book, and my thinking Tam partie Ef Margaret Andersen, Elizabeth Fe, Jae Fat, Donna Hat- seay, and Naney Hareock Mangaree Andersen and Naney Harsock fr warm and loving collabora in politcal and igellectual projets through the years this book-was emerging “Frank Dilley for his continal efforts toensure that departmental governance teats women fry (0 ne Nacional Endowment for the Humanities, the National Science Foundation, and the University of Delaware for sumine ants frming me to workup some ofthe sues th Fund fr the 1 ovement of Pos-Secondary Education fr 2 Mina Shaughnessy retest the Melon Foundation fora fellowship atthe Wellesley eee Research on Women; and the University of Delaware for 1 Acknowledges ‘habe al of which provided te tie necessary wo bring hi Sort competion " competion fr be willing, cher, a wneing = a rm ere and afer the asval of Kayo 2 rer, Da and any, for hi Tving elem (ort prin vate by the cogs B- ty ea wc chy ape a [Nework, Dear PREFACE Sie the mid-1970s, feminist eritismsof cence have valved from a eri ta revoluonay positon, om analyses tht offered the olity of improving the scene we hae, to al for a wansor- ‘Eason in the very foundations bth of cence and of the clues that uid it value. We began by aking, “What isto be done about the “uson of women in scinge?™—the “woman question” in sient Now forint aien poe 2 diferent question: "sit possible o we for emancipatory ends scence that are apparently $0 inimately ioe Nolved in Western, boungens nd masculine projets?” —the “science {ues inferinisn, The radial feminist poston holds thatthe epstemolgies, met physics ethics and politics of the dominant forms of selene are an- ‘Tcetsic and mutually supportive that despite the deeply ingrained Westen altura belie in scence’ isinsie progresivenes tiene telay serves primarily regressive soil ends and tht te soi cure of soence, many off apletons and technologies, is ‘Hes of defn esearch problems and designing experiment, ‘tas of constructing and conferring meanings ae tor only sexist bat Us rcs, classs and catoraly coer] In their analyses of how ender symbols; the soci division of aor by gender, and the Spstrucdon of individual gender identity have affected the history Sd philosophy of science, feminist thinrs have challenged the o- {alettal and soil orders a their very foundations. “These feminine ergue, which Jebunk much of what we ale in seers Westen alte, sppeat to emerge from outside his clr ° Profice -Thav is indeed the ease insofar as women have been excluded from Tepes of defining the culate ad have Ben concede the Petuint which men in power define their projects. Yet such “etal seaglding” ofthe eters of social practice an hough aera inte ean of modern Wesco istry and ts xpi $s frm wet rest of traditional social practices and beliefs. One sae reha androcenziam natural” and ight; another i fit) sete fpagressiveness of scenic raioality. From this perspective, in the ro rraques of sience may be seen a calling for = tare wre ePimelcctul, moral, social, and political revolution than the radi syle Wester cultures could have imagined. Histor: eae jus such esluons—and no de posse of ei