Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-mkpzs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T00:35:08.024Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Science and the Politics of Hunger

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2022

Mary Tiles
Mary Tiles*
Affiliation:
University of Hawai'i at Manoa
*
†Department of Philosophy, University of Hawai'i at Manoa, 2530 Dole Street, Honolulu, HI 96822; e-mail: [email protected].
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The problem of hunger is a problem of the inequitable distribution of food entitlements. I argue that ‘modern’ science is implicated in the current form of this problem and that it can only contribute to its resolution, rather than exacerbation, if the forms of its implication are acknowledged. But this requires acceptance of the claim that science is not value-neutral. In part this paper is also an examination, in a particular problem context, of some dimensions of disputes over the value neutrality of science.

Type
Symposium: Science and Social Responsibility
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 64 , Issue S4: Supplement. Proceedings of the 1996 Biennial Meetings of the Philosophy of Science Association. Part II: Symposia Papers Dec., 1997 , 1997 , pp. S161 - S174
Copyright
Copyright © Philosophy of Science Association 1997

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Drèze, J. and Sen, A. (1989), Hunger and Public Action. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Engels, F. (1940), Dialectics of Nature. New York: International Publishers.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Eugene S. (1992), Engineering and the Mind's Eye. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Hacking, I. (1992), “The Self-Vindication of the Laboratory Sciences”, in Pickering, A. (ed.), Science as Practice and Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 29–64.Google Scholar
Jullien, François (1995), The Propensity of Things: Toward a History of Efficacy in China. Trans, by J. Lloyd. New York: Zone Books. Originally published 1992 as La propension des choses: pour une histoire de l'eficacité en Chine. Paris: Editions de Seuil.Google Scholar
Kloppenburg, J. R., Jr, . (1988), First The Seed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Krishnaji, N. (1992), Pauperising Agriculture. Bombay: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kuhn, T. (1962), The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (1983), “Give Me a Laboratory and I Will Raise the World”, in Knorr, K. and Mulkay, M. (eds.), Science Observed: Perspectives on the Social Study of Science. Los Angeles: Sage, pp. 142–170.Google Scholar
Latour, B. (1993), We Have Never Been Modern. Trans. by C. Porter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Originally published 1991 as Nous n'avons jamais été modernes: Essais d'anthropologie symmetrique. Paris: La Découverte.Google Scholar
Lipton, M. (with Longhurst, R.) (1989), New Seeds and Poor People. London: Unwin Hyman.Google Scholar
Manicas, P. (forthcoming), “Engels's Philosophy of Science”, in Carver, T. and Steger, M. (eds.), Engels. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. ([1843] 1973), System of Logic. The Collected Works of John Stuart Mill, Vol. VIII. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Palladino, P. (1993), “Between Craft and Science: Plant Breeding, Mendelian Genetics and British Universities, 1900–1920”, Technology and Culture 33: 737–756.Google Scholar
Sivin, N. (1995) “Why the Scientific Revolution Did Not Take Place in China—or Did It?”, in Science in Ancient China, VII. Brookfield, VT: Variorum.Google Scholar
Stewart, I. (1989), Does God Play Dice?: The Mathematics of Chaos. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tiles, M. (1986), “Mathesis and the Masculine Birth of Time”, International Studies in Philosophy of Science 1: 16–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tiles, M. (1987), “A Science of Mars or Venus?”, Philosophy Philosophy: 62–293. Reprinted in E. F. Keller and H. E. Longino (eds.), Feminism & Science. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996, pp. 220–234.Google Scholar
Tiles, M. (1990),“Of Heroes and Butterflies: Technological Dreams and Human Realities”, International Studies in Philosophy of Science 4: 89–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tiles, M. and Oberdiek, H. (1995), Living in a Technological Culture. London: Routledge.Google Scholar