Feminism and the Philosophy of Science
Feminism and the Philosophy of Science
A Critical Evaluation
Introduction
This paper is aims to critically evaluate whether feminism helps to provide a good alternative perspective to science. In the modern world, “science” has come to mean the intellectual and practical activity – characterised by observation and experiment – involving the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical or natural world.i However, in the pre-modern age “science” (from Latin, scientia) was simply defined as “knowledge”,ii i.e. understanding of truth and reality, without necessarily any specifications as to the domain of study (e.g., physical or metaphysical) or as to the methodology (e.g., pure intelligence or experience). This study will be mainly concerned with modern science, and we will henceforth simply use the word “science” to designate this.
The perspective of science is shaped by its underlying philosophy. The philosophy of science is determined with the underlying foundations, methods and the implications of science. The majority of the participants in the study of the philosophy of science are philosophers and with a lesser number of scientists also involved.iii Important scientists and philosophers that helped shape the foundations and methodology of modern science include Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543), Johannes Kepler (1571-1630), Francis Bacon (1561-1626), Rene Descartes (1596-1650), Galileo Galilei (1564-1642), Isaac Newton (1643-1727), Auguste Comte (1798-1857), and John Stuart Mill (1806-1873).iv
The philosophy of science can be viewed as a way of understanding and explaining how and why scientific research is carried out. At the centre of the philosophy of science is the debate about reality and theory; whether a theory accepted by science should be regarded as describing reality or not. Whereas it is widely held today, that in the case of the arts “good” or “bad” art, or “true” or “false” art is a matter of personal
A Critical Evaluation
Introduction
This paper is aims to critically evaluate whether feminism helps to provide a good alternative perspective to science. In the modern world, “science” has come to mean the intellectual and practical activity – characterised by observation and experiment – involving the systematic study of the structure and behaviour of the physical or natural world.i However, in the pre-modern age “science” (from Latin, scientia) was simply defined as “knowledge”,ii i.e. understanding of truth and reality, without necessarily any specifications as to the domain of study (e.g., physical or metaphysical) or as to the methodology (e.g., pure intelligence or experience). This study will be mainly concerned with modern science, and we will henceforth simply use the word “science” to designate this.
The perspective of science is shaped by its underlying philosophy. The philosophy of science is determined with the underlying foundations, methods and the implications of science. The majority of the participants in the study of the philosophy of science are philosophers and with a lesser number of scientists also involved.iii Important scientists and philosophers that helped shape the foundations and methodology of modern science include Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543), Johannes Kepler (1571-1630), Francis Bacon (1561-1626), Rene Descartes (1596-1650), Galileo Galilei (1564-1642), Isaac Newton (1643-1727), Auguste Comte (1798-1857), and John Stuart Mill (1806-1873).iv
The philosophy of science can be viewed as a way of understanding and explaining how and why scientific research is carried out. At the centre of the philosophy of science is the debate about reality and theory; whether a theory accepted by science should be regarded as describing reality or not. Whereas it is widely held today, that in the case of the arts “good” or “bad” art, or “true” or “false” art is a matter of personal