Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-pvkqz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-09-01T04:48:05.715Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Having It All: Naturalized Normativity in Feminist Science Studies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2020

Sharyn Clough
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The relationship between facts and values—in particular, naturalism and normativity—poses an ongoing challenge for feminist science studies. Some have argued that the fact/value holism of W.V. Quine's naturalized epistemology holds promise. I argue that Quinean epistemology, while appropriately naturalized, might weaken the normative force of feminist claims. I then show that Quinean epistemic themes are unnecessary for feminist science studies. The empirical nature of our work provides us with all the naturalized normativity we need.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
Hypatia , Volume 19 , Issue 1: Special Issue: Feminist Science Studies , Winter 2004 , pp. 102 - 118
Copyright
Copyright © 2004 by Hypatia, Inc.

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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Antony, Louise. 1993. Quine as feminist: The radical import of naturalized epistemology. In A mind of one's own: Feminist essays on reason and objectivity, ed. Antony, Louise and Witt, Charlotte. Oxford, UK: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Bleier, Ruth. 1984. Science and gender: A critique of biology and its theories on women. New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Calkins, Mary. 1896. Community of ideas of men and women. Psychological Review 3(4): 426–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Richmond. 1994. The virtues of feminist empiricism. Hypatia 9(1): 90–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, Richmond. 1998. Illusions of paradox: A feminist epistemology naturalized. New York: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Clough, Sharyn. 1998. A hasty retreat from evidence: The recalcitrance of relativism in feminist epistemology. Hypatia 13(4): 88–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clough, Sharyn. 1999. Quine and Davidson at the World Congress of Philosophy. American Philosophical Association Newsletters 99(1): 57–58.Google Scholar
Clough, Sharyn. 2002. What is menstruation for? On the projectibility of functional predicates in menstruation research. Studies in the History and Philosophy of the Biological and Biomedical Sciences 33: 719–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clough, Sharyn. 2003. Beyond epistemology: A pragmatistapproachto feminist science studies. Lanham, Md: Rowman and Littlefteld.Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald. 1984. On the very idea of a conceptual scheme. In Inquiries into truth and interpretation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald. 1986. A nice derangement of epitaphs. In Truth and interpretation: Perspectives on the philosophy of Donald Davidson, ed. LePore, Ernest. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald. 1990. Meaning, truth and evidence. In Perspectives on Quine, ed. Barrett, Robert and Gibson, Roger, Jr. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald. 1991a. A coherence theory of truth and knowledge. Reprinted in Reading Rorty: Critical responses to Philosophy and the mirror of nature (and beyond), ed. Malachowski, Alan. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Davidson, Donald. 1991b. Epistemology externalized. Dialectica 45(2–3): 191–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davidson, Donald. 1991c. Three varieties of knowledge. In A. J. Ayer memorial essays, ed. Griffiths, A. Phillips. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dummett, Michael 1986. Comments on Davidson and Hacking. In Truth and interpretation, ed. LePore, Ernest. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hall, Granville S. 1904. Adolescence: Its psychology and its relations to physiology, anthropology, sociology, sex, crime, religion and education. 2 vols. New York: D. Appleton & Co.Google Scholar
Haraway, Donna. 1989. Primate visions: Gender, race and nature in the world of modern science. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hollingworth, Leta Stetter. 1914. Variability as related to sex differences in achievement. American Journal of Sociology 19: 510–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kihlstrom, J.E. 1971. A male sexual cycle. In Current problems in fertility, ed. Ingleman‐Sundeberg, A. and Lunell, N.New York: Plenum.Google Scholar
Lancaster, Jane. 1975. Primate behavior and the emergence of human culture. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Montague, Helen, and Hollingworth, Leta Stetter. 1914. The comparative variability of the sexes at birth. American journal of Sociology 20: 335–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, Jack. 1997. The last dogma of empiricism. In Feminism, science and the philosophy of science, ed. Nelson, Lynn Hankinson and Nelson, Jack. Dordrecht: Kluwer.Google Scholar
Nelson, Lynn Hankinson. 1990. Who knows: From Quine to a feminist empiricism. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, Lynn Hankinson. 1993. A question of evidence. Hypatia 8(2): 172–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Okruhlik, Kathleen. 1994. Biology and society. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 20: 21–42.Google Scholar
Profet, Marjorie. 1993. Menstruation as a defense against pathogens transported by sperm. The Quarterly Review of Biology 68(3): 335–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Orman Quine, Willard. 1960. Word and object. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar
van Orman Quine, Willard. 1969. Epistemology naturalized. In “Ontological relativity” and other essays. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Orman Quine, Willard. 1981. On the very idea of a third dogma. In Theories and things. Cambridge, U.K.: The Belknap Press.Google Scholar
van Orman Quine, Willard. 1990a. Comment on Davidson. In Perspectives on Quine, ed. Barrett, Robert and Gibson, Roger Jr., Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
van Orman Quine, Willard. 1990b. Let me accentuate the positive. In Reading Rorty: Critical responses to Philosophy and the mirror of nature (and beyond), ed. Malachowski, Alan. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
van Orman Quine, Willard. 1990c. Three indeterminacies. In Perspectives on Quine, ed. Barrett, Robert and Gibson, Roger Jr., Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ramberg, Bjorn. 1988. Charity and ideology: The field linguist as social critic. Dialogue 27: 637–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rorty, Richard. 1979. Philosophy and the mirror of nature. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Scheman, Naomi. 1993. Though this be method, yet there is madness in it: Paranoia and liberal epistemology. In A mind of one's own: Feminist essays on reason and objectivity, ed. Antony, Louise and Witt, Charlotte. Oxford, UK: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Smuts, Barbara 1987. Gender, aggression and influence. In Primate societies, ed. Smuts, BarbaraCheney, DorothySeyfarth, RobertWrangham, Richard, and Struhsaker, Thomas. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Tavris, Carol. 1992. The mismeasure of woman. New York: Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
Tuana, Nancy. 1992. The radical future of feminist empiricism. Hypatia 7 (1): 100–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woolley, Helen Thompson. 1910. Psychological literature: A review of the recent literature on the psychology of sex. Psychological Bulletin 7(10): 335–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woolley, Helen Thompson. 1914. The psychology of sex. Psychological Bulletin 11 (10): 353–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar