Feminist scholarship questions the nature and function of the scientific community. For various reasons, science and technology have been referred to as “masculine” or “masculine.” One reason for this is that scientific disciplines and professions are dominated by men: significantly more men are scientists, especially in the natural sciences – physics, astrophysics, chemistry, mathematics, etc. Therefore, feminist science questions the dominance of one group and interjects with the concept of gender and power dynamics.
Science is considered to be unbiased and empirical in nature. However, because it is a male-dominated field, feminists argued that male characteristics were being projected onto the natural world. In this sense, the scientist is not just an observer or researcher; he is a mediator. Subjectivity plays a role here, but not in a harmless way; His perceptions reflect his observations of the natural world and the theories built around those observations.
Feminists argue that “knowledge is power” – in general, scientific knowledge gives the most power in modern society. Science is hidden beyond the surface of impartiality and is an integral part of the agencies that support and propagate racism, sexism and other hierarchies in modern society. The conquest of nature and beyond is closely linked to dominance over other individuals and groups and a split within the individual self in which the objective mind subjugates the emotional self.
Feminist science is all about answering questions like: Why isn’t science free from this if it is unbiased? Who occupies the dominant position of scientific knowledge and how does this affect the fundamental source of knowledge itself? Feminist scholarship seeks to answer these questions by incorporating feminist methods into scientific research. This was done through criticism of science.
Feminist criticism of science
Feminist critical perspectives challenge knowledge systems that marginalize women’s viewpoints. References to rationality, objectivity and scientific methods, which are of central importance for modern scientific projects, are deconstructed from a feminist perspective. Feminist scientists are critical of the underlying message of science. For example, the image of science as a representative of universal “truth” and the image of the scientist as an “object” are called into question. Some feminists point to various alternative ways of conceptualizing knowledge about the natural world.
Source: Dazed
The gendered subjectivity of scientific theories is reflected in the theories they formulate. For example, male traits (produced through social conditioning) such as aggression and competitiveness are translated into specific theories and images. This can include the image of the human immune system as a battlefield or of animals obsessed with competition and territoriality. In a sense, masculine characteristics are projected onto the natural world. There are various reasons why science is described as “masculine” or masculine. Francis Bacon, the most influential early philosopher of science, repeatedly described the natural world as feminine and as an object to be pursued, conquered, and dominated.
Feminists have emphasized how scientific theories are structured, reinforcing the hierarchical separation between men and women. Scientific theories are treated as knowledge that has gaps that can be deconstructed and reconstructed.
It is claimed that the scientist’s subjectivity does not enter into the picture of objectivity and rationality; This is carefully avoided by using universal, objective tests that could be replicated anywhere in the world. However, objectivity and rationality are conceptualized as male characteristics, and masculinity itself is socially constructed to include the elements of objectivity and rationality. Since the common understanding of masculinity focuses on successful men, it is assumed that they can detach themselves from emotions and concentrate completely emotionlessly on the objects of their investigation.
Feminists have emphasized how scientific theories are structured, reinforcing the hierarchical separation between men and women. Scientific theories are treated as knowledge that has gaps that can be deconstructed and reconstructed. The deconstruction of scientific knowledge exposes the deep-rooted processes of naturalizing male dominance in society, which is usually acceptable. Donna Haraway’s analysis of primatology (a discipline devoted to the scientific study of primates) shows how theoretical representations relate to popular culture images of primates. These popular ideas often guide research goals, scientific observations, and interpretations, thereby reinforcing positions of power—of men over women, of humans over animals, and so on.
Feminist criticism of science exposes the flawed assumptions that underlie many conventionally accepted understandings of the natural world and its diverse phenomena. Alternative understandings with more and more reality are possible. Overall, feminist criticism of science makes us think about how science was done in the past and how it can be improved to be fairer and more open to everyone.
Feminist science – origins and meaning
Feminist philosophies of science emerged in the 1980s and 90s, the period of the “science wars.” Interdisciplinary analysis of science during this period included examining how society shaped the context of research methodology.
Source: Gap Junction Science
Feminist scholarship also extends to questions about the methodology, epistemology, and ontology of scientific research. The scientific community viewed this shift as a gateway to relativism and a threat to the assumed objectivity of science, which they believed was guaranteed by the impartiality of its scientific method.
Early feminist philosophy of science and epistemology focused a significant amount of its attention on defending the concept that science based on feminist analysis was superior to science and was not incompatible with the goals of science (such as the search for truth). in the way critics had feared. Not all feminists wanted to completely change the way science is done; In fact, most of them wanted to maintain a sense of objectivity and combat relativism. Sandra Harding called people who believed that science was essentially factual and that feminist goals could be achieved by eliminating prejudice “feminist empiricists.”
Feminist scholarship is also intersectional; She is convinced that gender does not work alone. it interacts with race, class, sexuality, and other marginalized groups.
Rational choice theory, which does not take gender characteristics into account, can be accused of being influenced by sexist values. However, a feminist-empiricist answer is possible. It is not empirically appropriate for research to not consider gender when gender is an important factor. While this raises questions about relevance, it also suggests that values are unavoidable and should be considered in all important phenomena.
Feminist scholarship is also intersectional; She is convinced that gender does not work alone. it interacts with race, class, sexuality, and other marginalized groups. Feminist thinkers such as Ruth Hubbard, for example, have said that the medical field ignores women’s health needs because it treats the male body as the norm. The fact that women are not taken into account when studying heart health appears to be a sexist bias in research. This could be seen as simple sexism resulting from the assumption that men’s lives are more important than women’s.
Donna Haraway’s Cyborg Manifesto challenges the conventional boundaries between humans and machines and the gendered concepts that reinforce them. Haraway’s “cyborg” idea helps people think more openly about the identity and connection between science and society.
Rayna Rapp’s study of amniocentesis shows how medical technologies, particularly those used in reproductive health, influence women’s decisions and reveal what people value. Her work shows how women are treated differently by the medical system in terms of their power.
Through these critiques and examples, feminist scholarship seeks to change the way knowledge is created and understood. It pushes for more inclusive science that takes into account different viewpoints and challenges the biases that have shaped scientific findings to date. Feminist science incorporates gender and other social factors into the scientific method, thereby improving the possibility of equal study and achievement.
References:
- Bacon, Frances (1964). Thoughts and Conclusions and several other writings. Liverpool: Liverpool University Press.
- Harway, Donna. (1990). Monkeys, Cyborgs and Women: Reinventing Nature. Routledge & CRC Press.
- Harding, Sandra. (1986). The Science Question in Feminism, Ithaca NY: Cornell University Press.
- Rapp, Rayna. (2001). Gender, Body, Biomedicine: How Some Feminist Concerns Put Reproduction at the Center of Social Theory. Medical Anthropology Quarterly 15(4): 466-477.
- Lennon, Kathleen. (1999). “Natural Sciences,” in Alison M. Jaggar and Iris Marion Young (eds.), A Companion to Feminist Philosophy. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
- https://www.marxists.org/history/etol/newspape/atc/2412.html
- https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feminist-science