Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T19:26:53.325Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Biological Science and Feminist Values

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2022

Michae Ruse
Michae Ruse*
Affiliation:
University of Guelph
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

My topic is the relationship between science and values. Specifically, I will look at biological science, especially evolutionary theorizing, and at those values held dear (not to mention those values abhorred) by supporters of the feminist movement. Since discussions of this nature rapidly take on all of the fervour of a revivalist camp meeting, it is appropriate to begin with a text. I draw mine from Valley of the Amazons, the recent novel by Noretta Koertge. The conversation is between two women, Helen who is mllitantly anti-male, and Tretona, the heroine, who keeps one foot in the real world (of a kind), namely a philosophy of science department.

“So is the claim that men evolved after women? That's pretty speculative, isn't it? Just sounds like an inversion of the old Adam-before-Eve story to me.”

Type
Part XI. New Directions in the Philosophy of Mathematics
Information
PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association , Volume 1984 , Issue 2: Volume Two: Symposia and Invited Papers 1984 , 1984 , pp. 525 - 542
Copyright
Copyright © 1985 by the Philosophy of Science Association

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

Blaffer-Hrdy, S (1977). The Langurs of Abu: Female and Male Strategies of Reproduction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Bogess, J (1979). “Troop male membership changes and infant killing in langurs (Presbytis entellus).” Folia Primatologica 32: 65-107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowler, P (1976). Fossils and Progress. New York: Science History Publications.Google Scholar
Darwin, C (1859). On the Origin of Species. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Darwin, C (1871). Descent of Man. 2 vols. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
Dawkins, R (1976). The Selfish Gene. Oxford: Oxford University Press:.Google Scholar
de Waal, F (1982). Chimpanzee Politics: Power and Sex among Apes. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Haraway, D.J (1983). “The contest for primate nature: daughters of man-the-hunter in the field, 1960-1980.” In The Future of American Democracy: Views from the Left. Edited by Kann, M.E. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Pages 175-207.Google Scholar
Hubbard, R (1983). “Have only men evolved?” In Discovering Reality. Edited by Harding, S and Hintikka, M.B Dordrecht: Reidel. Pages 45-69.Google Scholar
Hull, D (1973). Darwin and His Critics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Koertge, N (1984). Valley of the Amazons. New York: St. Martin's Press.Google Scholar
Lyell, C. (1830-3). Principles of Geology. London: John Murray.Google Scholar
McMullin, E (1983). “Values In Science.” In PSA 1982 f Volume 2 . Edited by Asquith, P.D and Nickles, T. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association. Pages 3-28.Google Scholar
Morgan, E (1973). The Descent of Woman. New York: Bantam Books.Google Scholar
Nagel, E (1961). The Structure of Science. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ospovat, D (1981). The Development of Darwin's Theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Reed, E (1975). Woman's Evolution. New York: Pathfinder Press.Google Scholar
Ruse, M (1979). The Darwinian Revolution: Science Red In Tooth and Claw. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Ruse, M (1981). “What Kind of Revolution Occurred in Geology?” In PSA 1978. Volume 2 . Edited by Asquith, P.D and I. Hacking. East Lansing, MI: Philosophy of Science Association. Pages 210-273.Google Scholar
Ruse, M (1983). “The New Dualism: ‘res philosophica’ and ‘res historica.'” in Nature Animated. Edited by M. Ruse. Dordrecht: Reidel, Pages 3-25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruse, M (1985). Taking Darwin Seriously: A naturalistic Approaoh to Philosophy. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ruse, M and Wilson, E.O. ( 1986). “Moral Philosophy as Applied Science.” Philosophy 61: 173-192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Washburn, S.L (1951). “The new physical anthropology.” Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences Series 2, 13: 298-304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, E.O (1975). Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar