Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-27T15:44:55.788Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Circles of Reason: Some Feminist Reflections on Reason and Rationality1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 January 2012

Extract

Rationality and reason are topics so fraught for feminists that any useful reflection on them requires some prior exploration of the difficulties they have caused. One of those difficulties for feminists and, I suspect, for others in the margins of modernity, is the rhetoric of reason – the ways reason is bandied about as a qualification differentially bestowed on different types of person. Rhetorically, it functions in different ways depending on whether it is being denied or affirmed. In this paper, I want to explore these rhetorics of reason as they are considered in the work of two feminist philosophers. I shall draw on their work for some suggestions about how to think about rationality, and begin to use those suggestions to develop a constructive account that withstands the rhetorical temptations.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2005

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

Anderson, Elizabeth (2004). Uses of Value Judgments in Science Hypatia. Vol. 19, 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braidotti, Rosi (1994). Nomadic Subjects. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel (1980). The History of Sexuality, Vol. 1. New York, NY: Random House.Google Scholar
Fricker, Miranda (2000). Feminism in Epistemology: Pluralism without Postmodernism in Cambridge Companion to Feminism in Philosophy. Eds. Fricker, Miranda & Hornsby, Jennifer. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Haraway, Donna (1988). Situated Knowledges Feminist Studies. 14, 3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoagland, Sarah Lucia (2001). Resisting Rationality in Engendering Rationalities. Eds. by Tuana, Nancy & Morgen, Sandra. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Hume, David (2000). A Treatise of Human Nature. Eds. Norton, David Fate & Norton, Mary. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kourany, Janet (2003). A Philosophy of Science for the 21st Century Philosophy of Science 70, 1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LeDoeuff, Michèle (2003). The Sex of Knowing. Hamer, Kathryn & Code, Lorraine, Trs. New York and London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Lloyd, Genevieve (1984). The Man of Reason. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Longino, Helen E. (1990). Science as Social Knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Longino, Helen E. (2002). The Fate of Knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Longino, Helen E. (2005). How Values Can Be Good for Science in Values, Objectivity and Science. Eds. Machamer, Peter & Wouters, Gideon. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, Lynn Hankinson (2001). Relativism and Science Studies Scholarship in Engendering Rationalities. Eds. Tuana, Nancy & Morgen, Sandra. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, Lynn Hankinson & Wylie, Alison (1998). Coming to Terms with the Value(s) of Science Unpublished ms. available from the authors.Google Scholar
Rooney, Phyllis (1992). Values in Science in PSA 1992, Vol. I. Eds. Hull, David, Forbes, Micky, & Okruhlik, Kathryn. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association.Google Scholar
Rousseau, Jean Jacques (1968). Politics and the Arts: Letter to M. D'Alembert. Trs. by Bloom, Allan. Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Solomon, Miriam (2002). Social Empiricism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Wylie, Alison (2002). Thinking From Things. Berkeley & Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar