Feminist Epistemology and The Search For Liberating Knowledge

https://doi.org/10.22146/jf.36949

Rachmad Hidayat(1*)

(1) Universitas Gadjah Mada Yogyakarta
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


This paper discusses problems in dealing with masculinized knowledge and scientific enterprises, and seeks alternative epistemological strategies in achieving liberating and un-dominated knowledge production. A general problem with "mainstream" epistemology and philosophy of science from feminist perspectives is that the well accepted concept of knowledge and scientific practices derived from it deny the impacts of social and political dimension toward knowing activities and their results. Feminists observed that men and their masculinities have been reproducing their social and political domination into the practices and standard of objective knowledge. The paper takes on two questions. First, how masculinity as dominant social and political norm has influence the production of knowledge? Second, what epistemological strategies would allow the production of less dominating and liberating knowledge? Feminist theories of knowledge built on the belief that rational inquiry is social practice through which gender as cultural and political norms and reference give deep impacts toward knowing process and it results. A theory of liberating knowledge requires acknowledgement and acceptance of multiple methods and models of knowledge in accordance to specific situation of the knowing subjects. Through such epistemological understanding feminist theorists formulated epistemological strategies to reduce masculinity in the rational inquiries and well accepted science.

Keywords


feminist epistemology; knowledge production; gender; masculinity

Full Text:

PDF


References

Addelson, Kathryn, 1983, “The Man of Professional Wisdom”, In Harding and Hintikka, 165-86.

Alcoff, Linda and Elizabeth Potter Eds., 1993, Feminist Epistemologies, Routledge, New York and London.

Anderson, Elizabeth. 1995a, “Feminist Epistemology: An Interpretation and a Defense”, Hypatia, Vol. 10, No. 3, Analytic Feminism,  pp. 50-84

________, 1995b, “Knowledge, Human Interest and Objectivity in Feminist Epistemology”, Philosophical Topics, 23: 27-58.

________, 2004. “Uses of Value Judgments in Science: A General Argument, with Lessons from a Case Study of Feminist Research on Divorce”, Hypatia, 19(1): 1–24.

Bordo, Susan, 1987, The Flight to Objectivity: Essays on Cartesiansm and Culture, State University of New York Press, New York.

Code, Lorraine, 1991, What Can She Know?, Ithaca, Cornell University Press, New York.

_______, 1993, “Taking Subjectivity into Account”, in Alcoff, L. and E. Potter (Eds), Feminist Epistemologies, Routledge, New York and London.

Collins, Patricia Hill, 1990, Black feminist thought: Knowledge, consciousness, and the politics of empowerment, Unwin Hyman, Boston.

Daston, L., & Peter Galison, P., (2007), Objectivity, Zone Books, New York.

Dotson, Kristie, 2011, Tracking Epistemic Violence, Tracking Practices of Silencing, Hypatia Issue 26 (2):236-257

Fraser, Nancy, 1995, “False Antithesis”, In Benhabib, Butler, Cornell and Fraser.

Fraser, Nancy and Linda Nicholson. 1990. “Social Criticism without Philosophy”, In Nicholson.

Fricker, Miranda 2007. Epistemic Injustice: Power and the Ethics of Knowing, Oxford Scholarship Online

Haraway, Donna. 1989. Primate  Visions. New York: Routledge.

_______, 1991, “Situated Knowledges”, In Simians, Cyborgs and Women, Routledge, New York.

Harding, Sandra, 1986, The science question in feminism, Cornell University Press, Ithaca.

_______, 1991, Whose science? Whose Knowledge?, Ithaca, Cornell University Press, N. Y..

______, 1993, “Rethinking standpoint Epistemology: ‘What is Strong Objectivity?’”, In Alcoff and Potter.

______, 1998, Is Science Multicultural?: Postcolonialisms, Feminisms and Epistemologies, Bloomington, Indiana University Press, Ind..

Hartsock, Nancy, 1996, “Comment on Hekman’s ‘Truth and Method’: Truth or Justice”, Signs, 22: 367-73.

Hekman, Susan, 1996, Feminist Interpretations of Michel Foucault, The Pennysylvania State University Press.

Hookway, Christopher, 2010, Some Varieties of Epistemic Injustice: Reflections on Fricker, Episteme, Volume 7, Issue 2, pp. 151-163

Hrdy, Sarah, 1986, Empathy, polyandry, and the myth of the coy female, In Feminist approaches to science, ed. Ruth Bleier, Pergamon, New York.

Intemann, Kristen, 2011, Diversity and Dissent in Science: Does Democracy Always Serve Feminist Aims?, In Heidi E. Grasswick Feminist Epistemology and Philosophy of Science: Power in Knowledge (pp.111-132), Springer.

Jaggar, Allison, 1989, “Love and Knowledge: Emotion in feminist Epistemology”, In Garry and Pearsall.

Keller, Evelyn Fox,  1983, A feeling for the organism, Freeman, New York.

_______, 1985, The force of the pacemaker concept in theories of aggregation in cellular slime mold, In Reflections on gender and science, Yale University Press, New Haven.

Little, Margaret, 1995, “Seeing and Caring: the Role of Affect in Feminist Moral epistemology”, Hypatia, 10: 117-137.

Lloyd, Genevieve, 1984, The Man of Reason: ‘Male’ and ’Female’ in Western Philosophy, Mathuen and Co ltd, London.

Lloyd, Elisabeth,  1997a. “Feyerabend, Mill and Pluralism”, Philosophy of Science, 64: 396-407.

Longino, Helen, 1990, Science as social knowledge, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.

_______, 1993a, Essential tensions -- Phase two: Feminist, philosophical, and social studies of science, In A mind of one's own, See Antony and Witt 1993.

_______, 1993b, Subjects, power, and knowledge: Description and prescription in feminist philosophies of science, In Feminist epistemologies, See Alcoff and Potter 1993.

______,  1994, “In Search of Feminist Epistemology”, Monist, 77: 472-485.

______, 2001,  The Fate of Knowledge, Princenton University Press, Princenton.

Margonis, Frank, 2007, John Dewey, W. E. B. Du Bois, and Alain Locke: A Case Study in White Ignorance and Intellectual Segregation. in Shannon Sullivan and Nancy Tuana, Race and Epistemologies of Ignorance. State University of New York Press

Nelson, Lynn, 1993, Epistemological communities, In Feminist epistemologies, See Alcoff and Potter 1993.

______, 1995. “The Very Idea of Feminist Epistemology”, Hypatia, Vol. 10, No. 3, pp. 31-49

Potter, Elizabeth, 1993, Gender and epistemic negotiation, In Feminist epistemologies, See Alcoff and Potter 1993.

_______, 2001, Gender and Byle’s Law of Gases, Indiana University Press, Bloomington.

Shapin, Steven, 1994, A Social History of Truth, Civility and science in Seventeeth-century England, Chicago University Press, Chicago.

Solomon, Miriam, 2001, Social Empiricism, ,  MIT Press, London.

Sullivan, Shannon and Nancy Tuana, Race and Epistemologies of Ignorance. State University of New York Press Tuana, Nancy, ed., 1989, Feminism and science, Indiana University Press, Bloomington.

Wylie, Alison, 2004, “Why Standpoint Matters” in Sandra Harding, The Feminist Standpoint Theory Reader, Routledge, New York and London.

Wylie, Alison and Hankinson Nelson, 2007, “Coming to terms with the values of science: Insights from feminist science studies scholarship”, in Harold Kincaid, John Dupré, and Alison Wylie, Value-free science: Ideals and illusions, Oxford University Press, Oxford.



DOI: https://doi.org/10.22146/jf.36949

Article Metrics

Abstract views : 1071 | views : 836

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.




Copyright (c) 2018 Jurnal Filsafat

Jurnal Filsafat Indexed by:

Indonesian Publication Index (IPI)Google ScholarSinta (Science and Technology Index)


Jurnal Filsafat ISSN 0853-1870 (print), ISSN 2528-6811 (online)