Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-s22k5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T15:29:28.504Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Radical Future of Feminist Empiricism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2020

Nancy Tuana
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

I argue that Nelson's feminist transformation of empiricism provides the basis of a dialogue across three currently competing feminist epistemologies: feminist empiricism, feminist standpoint theories, and postmodern feminism, a dialogue that will result in a dissolution of the apparent tensions between these epistemologies and provide an epistemology with the openness and fluidity needed to embrace the concerns of feminists.

Type
Review Essay
Information
Hypatia , Volume 7 , Issue 1 , Winter 1992 , pp. 100 - 114
Copyright
Copyright © 1992 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

Biology and Gender Study Group. 1989. The importance of feminist critique for contemporary cell biology. In Feminism and science, ed. Tuana, Nancy. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Di Stefano, Christina. 1990. Dilemmas of difference: Feminism, modernity, and postmodernism. In Feminism/postmodernism, ed. Nicholson, Linda. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Eisenstein, Zillah. 1981. The radical future of liberal feminism. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Fraser, Nancy. 1989. Unruly practices: Power, discourse, and gender in contemporary social theory. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Fuss, Diana. 1989. Essentially speaking: Feminism, nature, and difference. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Harding, Sandra. 1986a. The science question in feminism. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Harding, Sandra. 1986b. The instability of the analytical categories of feminist theory. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 11 (4): 645–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harding, Sandra. 1990. Feminism, science, and the anti‐Enlightenment critiques. In Feminism/postmodernism, ed. Nicholson, Linda. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Harding, Sandra. 1991. Whose science? Whose knowledge? Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Hartsock, Nancy. 1983. Money, sex, and power: Toward a feminist historical materialism. New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Hartsock, Nancy. 1987. Re‐thinking modernism: Minority vs. majority theories. Cultural Critique 7: 187–206.10.2307/1354155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hekman, Susan. 1990. Gender and knowledge: Elements of a postmodern feminism. Boston: Northeastern University Press.Google Scholar
Irigaray, Luce. 1985. This sex which is not one. Gill, Gillian C., trans. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Keller, Catherine. 1986. From a broken web: Separation, sexism, and self. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Kristeva, Julia. 1987. In the beginning was love: Psychoanalysis and faith. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, Lynn Hankinson. 1990. Who knows: From Quine to a feminist empiricism. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.Google Scholar
Rose, Hilary. 1983. Hand, brain, and heart: A feminist epistemology for the natural sciences. Signs: A Journal of Women in Culture and Society 9 (1): 73–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, Hilary. 1988. Beyond masculinist realities: A feminist epistemology for the sciences. In Feminist approaches to science. Bleier, Ruth ed., New York: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Smith, Dorothy. 1974. Women's perspective as a radical critique of sociology. Sociological Inquiry 44: 7–13.10.1111/j.1475-682X.1974.tb00718.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Dorothy. 1979. A sociology for women. In The prism of sex: Essays in the sociology of knowledge. Sherman, Julia A. and Beck, Evelyn Torton eds., Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Smith, Dorothy. 1987. The everyday world as problematic: A feminist sociology. Boston: Northeastern University Press.Google Scholar