STS6401 Paper Week 12: Difference between revisions
Created page with 'Response to readings in STS 6401. Longino joins the rejection of feminist content, noting the impossibility of identifying a monolithic cognitive framework, but I see altern…' |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
Longino joins the rejection of feminist content, noting the impossibility of identifying a monolithic cognitive framework, but I see alternatives to that other than focusing only on process and practice. (pp. 46-47) The view that women can only do a subset of science or substandard work is not properly feminist, true, but to me that doesn't mean that feminism cannot inform the content itself; to me it merely focuses on the assignation of certain content to certain sexes. The content that ''all'' genders of people practice could be better informed by feminist critique. | Longino joins the rejection of feminist content, noting the impossibility of identifying a monolithic cognitive framework, but I see alternatives to that other than focusing only on process and practice. (pp. 46-47) The view that women can only do a subset of science or substandard work is not properly feminist, true, but to me that doesn't mean that feminism cannot inform the content itself; to me it merely focuses on the assignation of certain content to certain sexes. The content that ''all'' genders of people practice could be better informed by feminist critique. | ||
Back to Longino's argument (p. 47): If we change the practices and processes, are we not then changing the vectors of science and thus eventually the content? In educational programs such as getting more females into the field of science, we don't care so much about good science vs. bad science as we do about ''more'' science, ''broader'' science. Hmm...Maybe we should. | |||
''Italic text'' | |||
Revision as of 20:32, 29 November 2009
Response to readings in STS 6401.
Longino joins the rejection of feminist content, noting the impossibility of identifying a monolithic cognitive framework, but I see alternatives to that other than focusing only on process and practice. (pp. 46-47) The view that women can only do a subset of science or substandard work is not properly feminist, true, but to me that doesn't mean that feminism cannot inform the content itself; to me it merely focuses on the assignation of certain content to certain sexes. The content that all genders of people practice could be better informed by feminist critique.
Back to Longino's argument (p. 47): If we change the practices and processes, are we not then changing the vectors of science and thus eventually the content? In educational programs such as getting more females into the field of science, we don't care so much about good science vs. bad science as we do about more science, broader science. Hmm...Maybe we should. Italic text
