The Marginalization of Feminist Epistemology and What That Reveals About Epistemology ‘Proper’

Chapter

Abstract

Though feminist epistemology has been in place for a quarter century, it still remains marginalized, if not invisible, in ‘mainstream’ epistemology. An implicit, if not explicit, assumption that feminist epistemology is not epistemology ‘proper’ regularly underwrites this marginalization. The construction of feminist work as ‘other’ to epistemology ‘proper’ reflects the legacy of a philosophical history of sexism and racism more than it reflects a uniform coherent project or area of inquiry that has been in place under the rubric ‘epistemology.’ Specific epistemological as well as political insights into the development of epistemology (of knowledge about knowledge) are available when we critically examine the relationship between feminist epistemology and mainstream epistemology. These epistemological or, in many cases, metaepistemological insights merit particular attention and development at this time. The proliferation of different approaches or directions in epistemology in recent decades provides rich ground for advantageous feminist intervention. Such intervention is necessary for the recovery of epistemology as a central philosophical discipline attuned to worlds of moral and political complexity.

Keywords

Marginalization of feminist epistemology Epistemology ‘proper’ Feminist as other Metaepistemology Feminist metaepistemic advantage 

References

  1. Alcoff, Linda. 1993. How is epistemology political? In Radical philosophy: Tradition, counter-tradition, politics, ed. Roger S. Gottlieb, 65–85. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
  2. Alcoff, Linda, and Elizabeth Potter. 1993. Feminist epistemologies. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, Elizabeth. 2006. How not to criticize feminist epistemology: A review of scrutinizing feminist epistemology. Elizabeth Anderson’s philosophy home page. Jan. 19, 2006. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~eandersn/hownotreview.html A shorter version of this review appeared in Metascience 13 (2004): 395–399.
  4. Anderson, Elizabeth. 2009. Feminist epistemology and philosophy of science. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Winter 2009 edition), Edward N. Zalta, ed. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2009/entries/feminism-epistemology/.
  5. Bishop, Michael, and J.D. Trout. 2005. The pathologies of standard analytic epistemology. Nous 39(4): 696–714.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bleier, Ruth. 1984. Science and gender: A critique of biology and its theories on women. Elmsford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  7. Bordo, Susan. 1998. The feminist as other. In Philosophy in a feminist voice: Critiques and recons­tructions, ed. Janet A. Kourany, 296–312. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Clough, Sharyn. 2003. Beyond epistemology: A pragmatist approach to feminist science studies. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  9. Code, Lorraine. 1981. Is the sex of the knower epistemologically significant? Metaphilosophy 12(3–4): 267–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Code, Lorraine. 1987. Epistemic responsibility. Hanover: University Press of New England.Google Scholar
  11. Code, Lorraine. 1991. What can she know? Feminist theory and the construction of knowledge. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  12. Collins Patricia, Hill. 1991. Learning from the outsider within: The sociological significance of black feminist thought. In Beyond methodology: Feminist scholarship as lived research, ed. Mary Margaret Fonow and Judith A. Cook, 35–59. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Elgin, Catherine Z. 1996. Considered judgment. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Elgin, Catherine Z. 2006. From knowledge to understanding. In Epistemology futures, ed. Stephen Hetherington, 199–215. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Fausto-Sterling, Anne. 1992. Myths of gender: Biological theories of women and men, 2nd ed. New York: Basic Books. 1985.Google Scholar
  16. Fricker, Miranda. 2007. Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Grasswick, Heidi. 2008. Feminist social epistemology. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy (Fall 2008 edition), Edward N. Zalta ed. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2008/entries/feminist-social-epistemology/.
  18. Haack, Susan. 2003. Knowledge and propaganda: Reflections of an old feminist. In Scrutinizing feminist epistemology: An examination of gender in science, ed. Cassandra L. Pinnick et al., 7–19. Piscataway: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Harding, Sandra. 1980. The norms of social inquiry and masculine experience. In PSA 1980: Proceedings of the Biennial meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, vol. 2, ed. Peter D. Asquith and Ronald N. Giere, 305–324. East Lansing: Philosophy of Science Association.Google Scholar
  20. Harding, Sandra. 1986. The science question in feminism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  21. Harding, Sandra, and Merrill B. Hintikka (eds.). 1983. Discovering reality: Feminist perspectives on epistemology, metaphysics, methodology, and philosophy of science. Dordrecht: D. Reidel Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  22. Haslanger, Sally. 2002. On being objective and being objectified. In A mind of one’s own: Feminist essays on reason and objectivity, 2nd ed, ed. Louise M. Antony and Charlotte E. Witt, 209–253. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  23. Haslanger, Sally. 2008. Changing the ideology and culture of philosophy: Not by reason (Alone). Hypatia 23(2): 210–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Heldke, Lisa. 1989. John Dewey and Evelyn Fox Keller: A shared epistemological tradition. In Feminism & science, ed. Nancy Tuana, 104–115. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  25. Hendricks, Vincent F., and Duncan Pritchard (eds.). 2008. New waves in epistemology. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  26. Hetherington, Stephen (ed.). 2006. Epistemology futures. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  27. Heyes, Cressida J. 1999. The backlash against feminist scholars and scholarship: Introduction. American Philosophical Association Newsletter on Feminism and Philosophy 99(1): 36–40.Google Scholar
  28. Janack, Marianne. 2004. Feminist epistemology. Internet encyclopedia of philosophy. www.iep.utm.edu/fem-epis/.
  29. Keller, Evelyn Fox. 1982. Feminism and science. Signs 7(3): 589–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Keller, Evelyn Fox. 1985. Reflections on gender and science. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Klee, Robert. 2003. Feminist epistemology as folk psychology. In Scrutinizing feminist epistemology: An examination of gender in science, ed. Cassandra L. Pinnick et al., 31–44. Piscataway: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Klein, Ellen R. 1996. Feminism under fire. Amherst: Prometheus Books.Google Scholar
  33. Koertge, Noretta. 1996. Feminist epistemology: Stalking an un-dead horse. In The flight from science and reason, ed. Paul R. Gross, Norman Levitt, and Martin W. Lewis, 413–419. New York: The New York Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  34. Le Doeuff, Michèle. 1989. The philosophical imaginary (trans: Colin Gordon). Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Leiter, Brian (ed.). 2004. The future for philosophy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Lloyd, Genevieve. 1993. The man of reason: ‘Male’ and ‘Female’ in Western philosophy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. 1984.Google Scholar
  37. Lloyd, Elisabeth A. 1995. Objectivity and the double standard for feminist epistemologies. Synthese 104: 351–381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Lloyd, Genevieve. 2002. Maleness, metaphor, and the “crisis” of reason. In A mind of one’s own: Feminist essays on reason and objectivity, 2nd ed, ed. Louise M. Antony and Charlotte E. Witt, 73–89. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  39. Longino, Helen. 1981. Scientific objectivity and feminist theorizing. Liberal Education 67(3): 33–41.Google Scholar
  40. Longino, Helen. 1994. In search of feminist epistemology. The Monist 77(4): 472–485.Google Scholar
  41. MacKinnon, Catharine A. 1982. Feminism, marxism, method, and the state: An agenda for theory. Signs 7(3): 515–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Mills, Charles. 1997. The racial contract. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Nelson, Lynn Hankinson. 1995. The very idea of feminist epistemology. Hypatia 10(3): 31–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Nelson, Lynn Hankinson, and Jack Nelson (eds.). 2003. Feminist interpretations of W. V. Quine. University Park: Penn State Press.Google Scholar
  45. Pinnick, Cassandra L., Noretta Koertge, and Robert F. Almeder (eds.). 2003. Scrutinizing feminist epistemology: An examination of gender in science. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  46. Potter, Elizabeth. 2004. The science war front. The Women’s Review of Books 22(1, October): 7–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Quine, W.V.O. 1969. Epistemology naturalized. In Ontological relativity and other essays, 69–90. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Richards, Janet Radcliffe. 1996. Why feminist epistemology isn’t. In The flight from science and reason, ed. Paul R. Gross, Norman Levitt, and Martin W. Lewis, 385–412. New York: The New York Academy of Sciences.Google Scholar
  49. Richardson, Sarah S. 2010. Feminist philosophy of science: History, contributions, and challenges. Synthese 177:337–362.Google Scholar
  50. Roberts, Robert C., and W. Jay Wood. 2007. Intellectual virtues: An essay in regulative epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  51. Rooney, Phyllis. 1991. Gendered reason: Sex metaphor and conceptions of reason. Hypatia 6(2): 77–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Rooney, Phyllis. 1993. Feminist-pragmatist revisionings of reason, knowledge, and philosophy. Hypatia 8(2): 15–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Rooney, Phyllis. 2002. Philosophy, language, and wizardry. In Feminist interpretations of Ludwig Wittgenstein, ed. Naomi Scheman and Peg O’Connor, 25–47. University Park: Penn State Press.Google Scholar
  54. Rooney, Phyllis. 2003. Feminist epistemology and naturalized epistemology: An uneasy alliance. In Feminist interpretations of W.V. Quine, ed. Nelson Lynn Hankinson and Jack Nelson, 205–239. University Park: The Penn State University Press.Google Scholar
  55. Rooney, Phyllis. Forthcoming. What is distinctive about feminist epistemology at 25? In Out From the Shadows: Analytical Feminist Contributions to Traditional Philosophy, ed. Sharon Crasnow and Anita Superson. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  56. Rorty, Richard. 1979. Philosophy and the mirror of nature. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  57. Ruetsche, Laura. 2004. Virtue and contingent history: Possibilities for feminist epistemology. Hypatia 19(1): 73–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Seigfried, Charlene Haddock. 1996. Pragmatism and feminism: Reweaving the social fabric. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  59. Shelton, Jim D. 2006. The failure of feminist epistemology. Academic Questions 19(2): 82–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Tuana, Nancy and Shannon Sullivan (eds.). 2007. Race and epistemologies of ignorance. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  61. Superson, Anita M., and Ann E. Cudd (eds.). 2002. Theorizing backlash: Philosophical reflections on the resistance to feminism. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  62. Tuana, Nancy (ed.). 1989. Feminism & science. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  63. Tuana, Nancy, and Sandra Morgen (eds.). 2001. Engendering rationalities. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
  64. Tuana, Nancy and Shannon Sullivan eds. 2006. Feminist epistemologies of ignorance. Special issue of Hypatia 21(3, Summer 2006).Google Scholar
  65. Webb, Mark Owen. 2002. Feminist epistemology as whipping-girl. In Theorizing backlash: Philosophical reflections on the resistance to feminism, ed. Anita M. Superson and Ann E. Cudd, 49–65. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
  66. Williams, Michael. 2001. Problems of knowledge: A critical introduction to epistemology. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  67. Wylie, Alison. 2004. Why standpoint matters. In The Feminist standpoint theory reader: Intellectual & political controversies, ed. Sandra Harding, 339–351. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PhilosophyOakland UniversityRochesterUSA

Personalised recommendations