Monday, November 30, 2009
Multiculturalism and feminist philosophy (Harding)
What do you make of Harding's argument (in the class reading)? Is she making a good argument--to draw on postcolonial science studies as well as global & multicultural feminisms? What do you think about her general claim that modern science has followed the interests of Europeans?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
She does make a good argument. I do not think this is earth shattering news. This is like someone coming out to tell me that New Orleans has several brothels. It only make sense that modern science would be Eurocentric and Androcentric. The base of modern science in both of these because these are the people who financed the research. I think the more important question to ask is would it make a difference of any measure if it weren't? Would the same theories and conclusions been reached but with a different approach. What would have driven science without a need or want. Science is a slave to financing, although most scientist I am sure would do much research on their own had they the money themselves. If the majority of people financing the research are European males then guess who they want this research to benefit. I am sure most of the monies given to the scientific community for research are not from non profit agencies or gender neutral groups from developing countries. I know that modern sciences follows the interests of Europeans her clam is correct. Just like on a smaller scale the research done at a company is done to benefit them and not its competition.
ReplyDelete