We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
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
Andreas‐Grisebach, Manon, and Weisshaupt, Brigitte, eds. 1986. Was Philosophinnen denken II. Zurich: Ammann Verlag.Google Scholar
Bendkowski, Halina, and Weisshaupt, Brigitte, eds. 1983. Was Philosophinnen denken. Erne Documentation. Zurich: Ammann Verlag.Google Scholar
Beinssen‐Hesse, Silke, and Rigby, Kate. 1996. Out of the shadows: Contemporary German feminism. Melbourne: Melbourne University Press.Google Scholar
Deutscher, Penelope, ed. 2000. Hypatia special issue: Contemporary French women philosophers. Hypatia15 (4).Google Scholar
Klinger, Cornelia. 1998. Aesthetics. In A companion to feminist philosophy, ed. Jaggar, Alison M. and Marion Young, Iris. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Klinger, Cornelia. 1997. The concepts of the sublime and the beautiful in Kant and Lyotard. In Feminist interpretations of lmmanuel Kant, ed. May Schott, Robin. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
List, Elisabeth, and Studer, Herlinde, eds. 1989. Denkverhältnisse. Feminismus und Kritik. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Maihofer, Andrea. 1998. Care. In A companion to feminist philosophy, ed. Jaggar, Alison M. and Marion Young, Iris. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Nagl‐Docekal, Herta, ed. 1999. The feminist critique of reason revisited. Hypatia14 (1): 49–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nagl‐Docekal, Herta, ed. 1998. Modern moral and political philosophy. In A companion to feminist philosophy, ed. Jaggar, Alison M. and Marion Young, Iris. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Nagl‐Docekal, Herta, ed. 1997. Feminist ethics: How it could benefit from Kant's moral philosophy. In Feminist interpretations of lmmanuel Kant, ed. May Schott, Robin. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Nagl‐Docekal, Herta, and Pauer‐Studer, Herlinde, eds. 1996. Politische Theorie. Differenz und Lebensqualität. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
Nagl‐Docekal, Herta, and Pauer‐Studer, Herlinde, eds. 1993. Jenseits der Geschlechtermoral. Beiträge zur feministischen Ethik. Frankfurt am Main: Fischer.Google Scholar
Nagl‐Docekal, Herta, and Pauer‐Studer, Herlinde, eds. 1990. Denken der Geschlechterdifferenz. Neue Fragen und Perspektiven der feministischen Philosophie. Vienna: Wiener Frauenverlag.Google Scholar
Nagl‐Docekal, Herta, and Klinger, Cornelia, eds. 2000. Continental philosophy in feminist perspective: Re‐reading the canon in German. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.Google Scholar
Rössler, Beate. 2005. The value of privacy. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Rössler, Beate. 2002. Problems with autonomy. Hypatia17 (4): 143–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rumpf, Mechthild. 1993. Mystical Aura. In On Max Horkheimer: New perspectives, ed. Benhabib, Seyla, Bonss, Wolfgang, and McCole, John. Cambridge: MIT Press.Google Scholar