Skip to main content
Springer Nature Link
Log in

Feminist philosophy of science: history, contributions, and challenges

  • Published:
Synthese Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Feminist philosophy of science has led to improvements in the practices and products of scientific knowledge-making, and in this way it exemplifies socially relevant philosophy of science. It has also yielded important insights and original research questions for philosophy. Feminist scholarship on science thus presents a worthy thought-model for considering how we might build a more socially relevant philosophy of science—the question posed by the editors of this special issue. In this analysis of the history, contributions, and challenges faced by feminist philosophy of science, I argue that engaged case study work and interdisciplinarity have been central to the success of feminist philosophy of science in producing socially relevant scholarship, and that its future lies in the continued development of robust and dynamic philosophical frameworks for modeling social values in science. Feminist philosophers of science, however, have often encountered marginalization and persistent misunderstandings, challenges that must be addressed within the institutional and intellectual culture of American philosophy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.

References

  • Barad K. (1998) Agential realism: Feminist interventions in understanding scientific practices. In: Biagioli M. (eds) The science studies reader. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Barad K. M. (2007) Meeting the universe halfway: Quantum physics and the entanglement of matter and meaning. Duke University Press, Durham

    Google Scholar 

  • Berta P., Hawkins J. R. et al (1990) Genetic evidence equating SRY and the testis-determining factor. Nature 348(6300): 448–450

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bleier R. (1984) Science and gender: A critique of biology and its theories on women. Pergamon Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Bleier R. (1986) Feminist approaches to science. Pergamon Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Boxer M. J. (1998) When women ask the questions: Creating women’s studies in America. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Carranza J. (2009) Defining sexual selection as sex-dependent selection. Animal Behaviour 77: 749–751

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clutton-Brock T. H. (2009) Sexual selection in females. Animal Behaviour 77: 3–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creager A. N. H., Lunbeck E. et al (2001) Feminism in twentieth-century science, technology, and medicine. University of Chicago Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  • Dall S. R. X., McNamara J. M. et al (2006) Debating sexual selection and mating strategies. Science 312(5774): 689–697

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daston, L. (1991). Baconian facts, academic civility, and the prehistory of objectivity. In A. Megill (Ed.), Annals of scholarship (Vol. 8). New York: Annals of Scholarship.

  • DuPlessis R. B., Snitow A. B. (1998) The feminist memoir project: Voices from women’s liberation. Three Rivers Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Fausto-Sterling A. (1985) Myths of gender: Biological theories about women and men. Basic Books, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Fehr C. (2010) What’s in it for me? The benefits of diversity in scientific communities. In: Grasswick H. (eds) Feminist epistemology and philosophy of science: Power in knowledge. Springer, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Gannett, L. (2004). The biological reification of race. British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 55(2), 323–345.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gowaty, P. A. (2003). Sexual natures: How feminism changed evolutionary biology. Signs, 28(3), 901–921.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graves J. A. (1998) Evolution of the mammalian Y chromosome and sex-determining genes. The Journal of Experimental Zoology 281(5): 472–481

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graves J. A. (2000) Human Y chromosome, sex determination, and spermatogenesis—a feminist view. Biology of Reproduction 63: 667–676

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graves, J. A. (2002). Sex, genes and chromosomes: A feminist view. Women in Science Network Journal, 59.

  • Gross P. R., Levitt N. (1994) Higher superstition: The academic left and its quarrels with science. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway D. J. (1989) Primate visions: Gender, race, and nature in the world of modern science. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Haraway D. J. (1991) Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding S. (1993) Rethinking standpoint epistemology: What is ‘strong objectivity’?. In: Alcoff L., Potter E. (eds) Feminist epistemologies. Routledge, New York, pp 49–82

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding S. (1998) Is science multicultural? Postcolonialisms, feminisms, and epistemologies. Indiana University Press, Bloomington

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding S. G. (1986) The science question in feminism. Cornell University Press, Ithaca

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding S. G., Hintikka M. B. (1983) Discovering reality: Feminist perspectives on epistemology, metaphysics, methodology, and philosophy of science. D. Reidel, Hingham, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Haslanger S. (2000) Gender and race: (What) are they? (What) do we want them to be?. Noûs 34(1): 31–55

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haslanger S. (2008) Changing the ideology and culture of philosophy: Not by reason (alone). Hypatia 23(2): 210–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Howe F. (2000) The politics of women’s studies: Testimony from thirty founding mothers. Feminist Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobs, P. A., Brunton M. et al (1965) Aggressive behavior, mental sub-normality and the XYY male. Nature 208(5017): 1351–1352

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jarvik L. F., Klodin V. et al (1973) Human aggression and the extra Y chromosome. Fact or fantasy?. The American Psychologist 28(8): 674–682

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jordanova L. J. (1989) Sexual visions: Images of gender in science and medicine between the eighteenth and twentieth centuries. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, WI

    Google Scholar 

  • Jost A., Gonse-Danysz P. et al (1953) [Studies on physiology of fetal hypophysis in rabbits and its relation to testicular function]. Journal de Physiologie 45(1): 134–136

    Google Scholar 

  • Just W., Rau W. et al (1995) Absence of Sry in species of the vole Ellobius. Nature Genetics 11(2): 117–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keller E. F. (1985) Reflections on gender and science. Yale University Press, New Haven

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller E. F. (1992) Secrets of life, secrets of death: Essays on language, gender, and science. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Keller E. F., Longino H. E. (1996) Feminism and science. Oxford University Press, Oxford, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Kitcher, P. (2002a). Reply to Helen Longino. Philosophy of Science, 69, 569–572.

  • Kitcher P. (2002b) The third way: Reflections on Helen Longino’s the fate of knowledge. Philosophy of Science 59: 549–559

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kohlstedt, S. G., & Longino, H. E. (1997). The women, gender, and science question: What do research on women in science and research on gender and science have to do with each other? Osiris, 12, 3–15 (Special Issue: Women, Gender, and Science: New Directions).

    Google Scholar 

  • Koopman P., Gubbay J. et al (1991) Male development of chromosomally female mice transgenic for Sry. Nature 351(6322): 117–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lederman M., Bartsch I. (2001) The gender and science reader. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd E. (1996) Science and anti-science: Objectivity and its real enemies. In: Nelson L. H., Nelson J. (eds) Feminism, science, and the philosophy of science. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd E. A. (2005) The case of the female orgasm: Bias in the science of evolution. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd G. (1993) The man of reason: Male and female in western philosophy. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Longino H. (1992) Subjects, power, knowledge: Prescriptivism and descriptivism in feminist philosophy of science. In: Alcoff L., Potter E. (eds) Feminist epistemologies. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Longino H. (1996) Cognitive and non-cognitive values in science: Rethinking the dichotomy. In: Nelson J., Nelson L. H. (eds) Feminism and philosophy of science. Kluwer, Dordrecht

    Google Scholar 

  • Longino H., Doell R. (1983) Body, bias, and behavior: A comparative analysis of reasoning in two areas of biological science. Signs 9(2): 206–227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longino H. E. (1990) Science as social knowledge: Values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Longino H. E. (2002a) The fate of knowledge. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Longino H. E. (2002b) Reply to Philip Kitcher. Philosophy of Science 69: 573–577

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longino H. E. (2002c) Science and the common good: Thoughts on Philip Kitcher’s Science, Truth, and Democracy. Philosophy of Science 69: 560–568

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Longino H. E., Hammonds E. (1990) Conflicts and tensions in the feminist study of gender and science. In: Hirsch M., Keller E. F. (eds) Conflicts in feminism. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Lowe M., Hubbard R. (1983) Woman’s nature: Rationalizations of inequality. Pergamon Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Lunbeck E. (1994) The psychiatric persuasion: Knowledge, gender, and power in modern America. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  • Mandelbaum D. R. (1981) Work, marriage, and motherhood: The career persistence of female physicians. Praeger, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  • Margolis J., Fisher A. (2002) Unlocking the clubhouse: Women in computing. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayberry M., Subramaniam B. et al (2001) Feminist science studies: A new generation. Routledge, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • McClung C. E. (1902) The accessory chromosome: Sex determinant?. Biological Bulletin 3(1/2): 43–84

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDermott P. (1994) Politics and scholarship: Feminist academic journals and the production of knowledge. University of Illinois Press, Urbana

    Google Scholar 

  • McElreavey, K., Vilain E. et al (1993) A regulatory cascade hypothesis for mammalian sex determination: SRY represses a negative regulator of male development. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 90(8): 3368–3372

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merchant C. (1980) The death of nature: Women, ecology, and the scientific revolution. Harper & Row, San Francisco

    Google Scholar 

  • Millstein, R. (forthcoming). Differentiating natural selection, sexual selection, and social selection. Metascience.

  • Nelson L. H., Nelson J. (1996) Feminism, science, and the philosophy of science. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Novick P. (1988) That noble dream: The “objectivity question” and the American historical profession. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England

    Google Scholar 

  • Page D. C., Lahn B. T. (1997) Functional coherence of the human Y chromosome. Science 278: 675–680

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poovey, M. (1986). Scenes of an indelicate character: The medical “treatment” of Victorian women. Representations, 14, 137–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Richardson S. (2008) When gender criticism becomes standard scientific practice: The case of sex determination genetics. In: Schiebinger L. (eds) Gendered innovations in science and engineering. Stanford University Press, Palo Alto, CA, pp 22–42

    Google Scholar 

  • Rolin K. (2002) Gender and trust in science. Hypatia 17(4): 95–118

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosser S. (1987) Feminist scholarship in the sciences: Where are we now and when can we expect a theoretical breakthrough?. Hypatia 2(3): 5–17

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossiter M. W. (1982) Women scientists in America: Struggles and strategies to 1940. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore

    Google Scholar 

  • Roughgarden J. (2004) Evolution’s rainbow: Diversity, gender, and sexuality in nature and people. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Roughgarden J. (2009) The genial gene: Deconstructing Darwinian selfishness. University of California Press, Berkeley

    Google Scholar 

  • Roughgarden, J., & Akcay, E. (2009). Do we need a sexual selection 2.0? Animal Behaviour. doi:10.1016/j.anbehav.2009.06.006.

  • Roughgarden J., Oishi M. et al (2006) Reproductive social behavior: Cooperative games to replace sexual selection. Science 311(5763): 965–969

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Russett C. E. (1989) Sexual science: The Victorian construction of womanhood. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Said E. (1996) Representations of the intellectual: The 1993 Reith lectures. Vintage, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiebinger L. L. (1989) The mind has no sex?: Women in the origins of modern science. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiebinger L. L. (1993) Nature’s body: Gender in the making of modern science. Beacon Press, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiebinger L. L. (1999) Has feminism changed science?. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Schiebinger L. L. (2008) Gendered innovations in science and engineering. Stanford University Press, Stanford, CA

    Google Scholar 

  • Searle, J. R. (1993) Rationality and realism, what is at stake? Daedalus, 122(4), 55–83.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith-Rosenberg C., Rosenberg C. (1973) The female animal: Medical and biological views of woman and her role in nineteenth-century America. The Journal of American History 60(2): 332–356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Special Issue: Women, Science, and Society (1978). Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society. C. R. Stimpson and J. Burstyn. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, Vol. 4, p. 1.

  • Special Issue: Feminism and Science, I (1987). Hypatia. N. Tuana. Edwardsville, IL: Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville, Vol. 2, p. 3.

  • Special Issue: Feminism and Science, II (1988). Hypatia. N. Tuana. Edwardsville, IL: Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville, Vol. 3, p. 1.

  • Special Issue: Feminism and Science: In Memory of Ruth Bleier (1989). Women’s Studies International Forum. S. Rosser. New York: Pergamon, Vol. 12, no. 3.

  • Special Issue: Feminism and Science. (1995). Synthese. L. H. Nelson. Kluwer. Vol. 104, No. 3.

  • Special Issue: Women, Gender, and Science: New Directions (1997). Osiris. S. G. Kohlstedt and H. E. Longino. Chicago: University of Chicago, Vol. 12.

  • Special Issue: Gender and Science: New Issues (2003). Signs: journal of women in culture and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, Vol. 28, p. 3.

  • Special Issue: Feminist Science Studies (2004). Hypatia. L. H. Nelson and A. Wylie. Edwardsville, IL: Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville, Vol. 19, p. 1.

  • Stanton D. C., Stewart A. J. (1995) Feminisms in the academy. University Press of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevens N. M. (1905) Studies in spermatogenesis with especial reference to the accessory chromosome. Carnegie Institution, Washington, DC

    Google Scholar 

  • Tanner, N., & Zilhman, A. (1976). Women in evolution part I: Innovation and selection in human origins. Signs, 1, 558–608.

    Google Scholar 

  • Traweek S. (1988) Beamtimes and lifetimes: The world of high energy physicists. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuana N. (1989) Feminism and science. Indiana University Press, Bloomington

    Google Scholar 

  • Tuana, N., & Sullivan, S. (2007). Race and epistemologies of ignorance. SUNY series on philosophy and race. New York: SUNY Press.

  • Vilain, E. (2004). Expert interview transcript. Rediscovering biology: Molecular to global perspectives. Electronic media, Oregon Public Broadcasting and AnnenbergMediaLearner.org.

  • Wallen K., Lloyd E. A. (2008a) Clitoral variability compared with penile variability supports nonadaptation of female orgasm. Evolution and Development 10(1): 1–2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wallen K., Lloyd E. A. (2008b) Inappropriate comparisons and the weakness of cryptic choice. Evolution and Development 10(4): 398–399

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson E. B. (1905a) Studies on chromosomes I. The behavior of the idiochromosomes in Hemiptera. Journal of Experimental Zoology 2(3): 371–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson E. B. (1905b) Studies on chromosomes II. The paired microchromosomes, idiochromosomes and heterotropic chromosomes in Hemiptera. Journal of Experimental Zoology 2(4): 507–545

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Witkin H. A., Goodenough D. R. et al (1977) XYY men: Are they criminally aggressive?. Sciences (New York) 17(6): 10–13

    Google Scholar 

  • Witkin H. A., Mednick S. A. et al (1976) Criminality in XYY and XXY men. Science 193(4253): 547–555

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wylie, A., Okruhlik, K., et al. (1990). Philosophical feminism: A bibliographic guide to critiques of science. Resources for feminist research. Documentation sur la recherche féministe, 19(2).

  • Zanish-Belcher T. (1998) Still unheard by the mainstream: Locating serial articles on women in science. In: Gerhard K. H. (eds) Women’s studies serials: A quarter-century of development. Haworth Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Harvard University, Boylston Hall G-26, Cambridge, MA, 02138, USA

    Sarah S. Richardson

Authors
  1. Sarah S. Richardson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah S. Richardson.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Richardson, S.S. Feminist philosophy of science: history, contributions, and challenges. Synthese 177, 337–362 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-010-9791-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-010-9791-6

Keywords