Hostname: page-component-6bf8c574d5-h6jzd Total loading time: 0.001 Render date: 2025-02-14T22:36:33.674Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Methodology, Ideology and Feminist Critiques of Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2022

Noretta Koertge
Noretta Koertge*
Affiliation:
Indiana University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This paper deals briefly with two questions which I have discussed elsewhere (Koertge 1981 and forthcoming):

  1. a) If all scientists were perfect Popperians (i.e., absolutely scrupulous with respect to methodology), how much influence could their backgrounds have? I include under background: the individual's “background knowledge” (in Popper's sense), psycho-sexual upbringing, class origins or identification, metaphysics, and ideology. This is a rather mixed bag and I hope the context will make clear whether it is primarily the person's values which are influential or his/her prescientific beliefs.

  2. b) Having argued that it is possible for background to play a role, I then ask whether the ideals of feminism suggest the need for a new methodology and epistemology for science. I will comment in particular on Harding's paper in this volume.

Type
Part V. Social Values and Social Science
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1980 , Issue 2: Volume Two: Symposia and Invited Papers 1980 , 1980 , pp. 346 - 359
Copyright
Copyright © 1981 by the Philosophy of Science Association

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

Arena, W. (1979). The Man-Eatlng Myth: Anthropology and Anthropophagy. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Bacon, Francis. (1620). “Novum Organum.” In Instauratio Magna. London: J. Blllium. (As reprinted in The New Organon and Related Writings. (ed.) Anderson, F.H. . New York: Liberal Arts Press, 1960. Pages 33-268.)Google Scholar
Chagnon, N.A. and Irons, W. (1979). Evolutionary Biology and Human Social Behavior: An Anthropological Perspective. Belmont: Duxbury Press.Google Scholar
Duhem, Pierre. (1906). La théorie physique: son obiet et sa structure. Paris: Chevalier & Riviere. (Translated as The Aim and Structure of Scientific Theory (trans.) Wiener, P., Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1975).Google Scholar
French, Marilyn. (1980). Shakespeare's Division of Experience. New York: Summit Books.Google Scholar
Harding, S. (1981). “The Norms of Social Inquiry and Masculine Experience.” In PSA 1980, Volume 2. Edited by P.D. Asquith and R.N. Giere, East Lansing, Michigan: Philosophy of Science Association. Pages 305-324.Google Scholar
Hartsock, N.C.M. (1981). “Social Life and Social Science: The Significance of the Naturalist/Intentionalist Dispute.” In PSA 1980 Volume 2. Edited by Asquith, P.D. and Giere, R.N.. East Lansing, Michigan: Philosophy of Science Association. Pages 325-315.Google Scholar
Hesse, Mary B. (1966). Models and Analogies in Science. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.Google Scholar
Colin, Howson, (ed.). (1976). Method and Appraisal in the Physical Sciences. New York, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jensen, A.R. (1972). Genetics and Education. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Jensen, A.R.. (1973). Educability and Group Differences. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Koertge, N. (1975). “Popper's Metaphysical Research Program for the Human Sciences.” Inquiry 18: 437-462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koertge, N. ‘(1981). “Ideologic, Wissenachaft und eine freie Gesellschaft: In Versuchungen Auf3atze zur Phllosophie Paul Feyerabends. Edited by Duerr, H.P.. Frankfurt: Suhrkamp Verlag, Pages 95-115.Google Scholar
Koertge, N .(forthcoming). “Preface: Philosophy of Science and Homosexology” Journal of Homosexuality.Google Scholar
Kohlberg, Lawrence. (1968). “The Child As Moral Philosopher.” Psychology Today 2(4): 27-30.Google Scholar
Lakatos, Imre. (1978). The Methodology of Scientific Research Programs. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merchant, Carolyn (1980). The Death of Nature: Women, Ecology and the Scientific Revolution. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Suppe, F. (forthcoming). “The Ball/Weinberg Study and Future Priorities for Research on Homosexuality.” Journal of Homosexuality.Google Scholar