Feminist Empiricism Draws in Various Ways
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
2 FEMINIST EMPIRICISM CATHERINE E. HUNDLEBY eminist empiricism draws in various ways developing new accounts of agency in knowl- on the philosophical tradition of empiri- edge emerges as the second theme in feminist F cism, which can be defined as epistemol- empiricism. ogy that gives primary importance to knowledge Most feminist empiricists employ the meth- based on experience. Feminist demands for atten- odology for developing epistemology known as tion to women’s experiences suggest that empiri- naturalized or naturalist epistemology. Naturalism cism can be a promising resource for developing is controversial, but it welcomes disputation, a feminist account of knowledge. Yet feminists takes up new resources for epistemology on an also value empiricism’s purchase on science and ongoing basis, and encourages multiple approaches the empiricist view that knowers’ abilities depend to the evaluation of knowledge. This pluralism on their experiences and their experiential histo- undercuts naturalism’s and empiricism’s conser- ries, including socialization and psychological vative tendencies and imbues current formula- development. tions of empiricism with radical potential. This chapter explores the attractions of empiricism for feminists. Feminist empiricist analysis ranges from broad considerations about FEMINIST ATTRACTION TO EMPIRICISM popular understandings to technical analysis of narrowly defined scientific fields. Whatever the Empiricism traces in the philosophy of the scope, feminist reworkings of empiricism have global North as far back as Aristotle,1 but it is two central themes. The first theme is the inter- classically associated with the 18th-century play among values in knowledge, especially British philosophers, John Locke, George connecting traditionally recognized empirical Berkeley, and David Hume. Most recently the values, such as evidence and objectivity, with noteworthy empiricists include the logical moral and political values. The interplay of these empiricists as well as Willard Van Orman Quine values undermines the traditional association of and his naturalist followers. All empiricists empirical knowledge with individual knowers, emphasize the role of sensory experience in and the separation of individual knowledge from knowledge—evidence, data, and facts—and the politics of communities, by suggesting that downplay the role of innate ideas and inborn the knower is not an isolated person. In this way, mental capacities, which rationalists have his- contesting the nature or locus of the knower and torically championed. Science provides especially 28 Chapter 2 Feminist Empiricism–•–29 good examples of empirical knowledge, and most feminist empiricism is analogous to liberal feminist empiricists focus on the types of knowl- feminism. Both revise traditionally accepted edge produced by science. Although feminists approaches to the problems at hand: empiri- substantially revise empiricism, the traditional cist approaches to scientific knowledge and association remains attractive because of its rhe- liberal approaches to democratic politics, torical power to engage practicing scientists and respectively.2 The political mainstream and the academic philosophers. The naturalist form of culture of science give less currency to more empiricism also insists on attention to the social contested socialist, post-structuralist, and post- and physical embodiment of knowledge that colonial theoretical orientations (Harding, concerns feminists. 1989). Yet traditional rhetoric can convey radi- Empiricism’s concern with identifying and cal ideas, and, when it does, it can be far more making the most of the strengths of science pro- powerful than the more obviously revolution- vides feminists with a useful point of departure ary approaches. Therefore, a radical future can for theorizing about knowledge. Many of the emerge from feminist empiricism just as Zillah early 20th-century logical empiricists aimed to Eisenstein argued it does from liberal feminism develop a science that would serve social pur- (Harding, 1986; Tuana, 1992). poses, including sociopolitical emancipation of The rhetorical advantage can be strategically various sorts; and so the goal of an emancipa- essential because it allows feminists to transform tory science is part of the empiricist heritage the power of science. (Okruhlik, 2003). Attention to the strengths of science supports the development of feminist The point of feminist science criticism must, in the “successor science projects” (Harding, 1986). end, be to change science, and changing science Feminist experiences as scientists and feminist requires changing the practices of scientists. Hence, analyses of scientific problems orient most scientists must be brought into the dialogue. Since feminist empiricist analysis. Yet some feminist scientists are empiricists, that dialogue will have to empiricists consider knowledge in a wider make room, at least in the beginning, for empiri- domain that includes everyday understanding cists and for, at least as a topic of discussion, and that draws on diverse sources of experience empiricism. (Nelson, 1990, pp. 6–7) (Code, 2006a). The experiences from which we gain knowledge do not all arise from scientific Appealing to the traditional empirical valuation methodology and may even include reading fic- of experience and logic provides a strategic tion (Code, 2006b). This broad view of experi- advantage for feminism. Yet, feminists must ence is congruent with Quine’s expansive notion rework empiricism and our understanding of of science that includes the experiential knowl- what constitutes scientific standards in order to edge of people with no special training (Haack, account for the role of sociopolitical values, as 1993; Nelson, 1990). must the not-specifically feminist promoters of Representing progressive concerns and lib- the empiricist tradition. eratory values in empiricist terms is rhetorically Many feminist epistemologists gain inspira- powerful, providing persuasive force and thus tion from a late 20th-century development of strategic advantage that eludes more explicitly empiricism known as “naturalized” or “natural- progressive or revolutionary theories. Scientists ist” epistemology. Naturalists’ attention to the and Anglo-American philosophers of science situation of human physical and cultural embodi- tend to conceive of science in empiricist terms, ment abandons abstract ideals of knowledge that and the public understanding of science follows assume an omniscient god’s-eye view of val- suit. In both these rarefied and commonplace ues or ideals, such as knowledge and justice, contexts, using the terminology of “facts” and provides a concrete account of epistemic (Code, 2006a), “evidence” (Nelson, 1993), and agency—who knows. The same approaches that “objectivity” (Longino, 1990) provides a valu- naturalists reject on empiricist grounds feminists able discursive authority. reject for being implicitly masculine: disassoci- Because of empiricism’s historical centrality ating ideal understanding from the material to the philosophy of science in the global North, realities of human existence excludes or at best 30–•–PART I FEMINIST PERSPECTIVES ON KNOWLEDGE BUILDING further marginalizes typical or traditional wom- methods operate in specified contexts, from en’s ways of engaging the world in the global broadly cultural to narrowly academic domains. North and conflicts with the dominant ideals of In both academic microbiology and sex edu- femininity. Women’s experience and knowledge cation for children and adolescents, the por- claims gain credibility from their grounding in trayed relationship between egg and sperm in material and empirical resources for understand- the process of fertilization reflects androcen- ing. Naturalism suggests that new ways to trism and other sexist values and is often treated address and redress the traditional Western dis- as a fairy-tale romantic courtship. Images of the counting of these forms of understanding can be egg or ovum range from whoring to dutiful found in scientific and historical accounts of wifehood (The Biology and Gender Study knowledge (Hundleby, 2002). Group, 1988) and even to hunted prey (Martin, Thus, feminist epistemologists, whether or 1991). At the same time, the sperm appears as a not they consider themselves naturalists or even victorious hero reminiscent of characters in the empir icists, probably demonstrate most thor- Odyssey or the Aeneid (The Biology and oughly the use of empirical data to scrutinize Gender Study Group, 1988). Even using the science, which is the method of philosophical term “fertilization” to name the process that can epistemology that naturalists recommend. be more accurately described as “cellular Feminist naturalists especially—like any natural- fusion” assumes an asymmetry in activity ists—appropriate science to provide accounts of (Longino, 1997). These models attribute to the knowledge; however, as Phyllis Rooney (2003) male sperm cell an active role that invokes argues, feminist naturalism extends to reflexive social norms of masculinity and attribute to the examinations of the underlying motivations and female ovum a passive role. Both genderings worldviews of the social and individual cognitive receive reinforcement from explicitly gendered sciences. Background assumptions—about the imagery and go far beyond the very limited nature of gender as a dimension for investigating “sex” we can attribute to a single cell.3 knowledge, for instance—are not merely noted