Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-gb8f7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-30T15:10:25.790Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Feminist Philosophy and the Genetic Fallacy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2020

Margaret A. Crouch
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Feminist philosophy seems to conflict with traditional philosophical methodology. For example, some uses of the concept of gender by feminist philosophers seem to commit the genetic fallacy. I argue that use of the concept of gender need not commit the genetic fallacy, but that the concept of gender is problematic on other grounds.

Type
Research Article
Information
Hypatia , Volume 6 , Issue 2 , Summer 1991 , pp. 104 - 117
Copyright
Copyright © 1991 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.)

References

Alcoff, Linda. 1988. Cultural feminism versus post‐structuralism: The identity crisis in feminist theory. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 13(3): 405–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bordo, Susan. 1986. The Cartesian masculinization of thought. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 11(3): 439–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bordo, Susan. 1987. The flight to objectivity: Essays on Cartesianism and culture. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Crouch, Margaret A. 1990. A “limited” defense of the genetic fallacy (unpublished).Google Scholar
Flax, Jane. 1983. Political philosophy and the patriarchal unconscious: A psychoanalytic perspective on epistemology and metaphysics. In Discovering reality: Feminist perspectives on epistemology, metaphysics, methodology and philosophy of science, Harding, Sandra and Hintikka, Merrill, eds. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
Flax, Jane. 1987. Postmodernism and gender relations in feminist theory. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 12(4): 621–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ginzberg, Ruth. 1989. Feminism, rationality and logic. Newsletters on Computer Use, Feminism, Law, Medicine, Teaching 88(2): 34–39.Google Scholar
Grant, Judith. 1987. I feel therefore I am: A critique of female experience as the basis for a feminist epistemology. Women and Politics 7(3): 88–114.Google Scholar
Grimshaw, Jean. 1986. Philosophy and feminist thinking. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Harding, Sandra. 1984. Is gender a variable in conceptions of rationality? A survey of issues. In Beyond domination: New perspectives on women and philosophy, Gould, Carol C., ed. Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Allanheld.Google Scholar
Harding, Sandra. 1986. The science question in feminism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Harding, Sandra. 1987. The method question. Hypatia 2(3): 19–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hartsock, Nancy. 1983. The feminist standpoint: Developing the ground for a specifically feminist historical materialism. In Discovering reality: Feminist perspectives on epistemology, metaphysics, methodology and philosophy of science. Harding, Sandra and Hintikka, Merrill, eds. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
Hawkesworth, Mary E. 1989. Knowers, knowing, known: Feminist theory and claims of truth. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 14(3): 533–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keller, Evelyn Fox. 1982. Feminism and science. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 7(3): 589–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levin, Margarita. 1988. Caring new world: Feminism and science. American Scholar 57: 100–106.Google Scholar
Lloyd, Genevieve. 1984. The man of reason: “Male” and “female” in western philosophy. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Okin, Susan Moller. 1979. Women in western political thought. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Reichenbach, Hans. 1938. Experience and prediction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Reichenbach, Hans. 1953. The rise of scientific philosophy. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Ruddick, Sara. 1989. Maternal thinking: Toward a politics of peace. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Salmon, Wesley. 1970. Bayes's theorem and the history of science. In Historical and philosophical perspectives of science. Stuewer, Roger, ed. Minnesota studies in the philosophy of science vol. 5. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Salmon, Wesley. 1984. Logic. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice‐Hall.Google Scholar
Scheman, Naomi. 1983. Individualism and the objects of psychology. In Discovering reality: Feminist perspectives on epistemology, metaphysics, methodology and philosophy of science. Harding, Sandra and Hintikka, Merrill, eds. Dordrecht, Holland: D. Reidel.Google Scholar
Trebilcot, Joyce, ed. 1984. Mothering: Essays in feminist theory. Totowa, NJ: Rowman and Allanheld.Google Scholar