Whose Science? Whose Knowledge?: Thinking from Women's Lives (Paperback)

~ Sandra Harding (Author) "The feminist discussions of science, technology, and theories of knowledge occur at a moment of rising skepticism about the benefits that the sciences and their..." (more)
Key Phrases: New York, African American, North Atlantic (more...)

Editorial Reviews

From Publishers Weekly

In a dozen intriguing, thought-provoking essays viewing science and its practice from a feminist perspective, Harding takes up some of themes from her earlier work The Science Question in Feminism. ``Why `Physics' Is a Bad Model for Physics'' argues that the image of ``pure'' science as value-free and distinct from applied science and technology is an illusion and, further, that science with no socially useful application could ``reasonably be seen as a make-work welfare program for the middle classes.'' ``What Is Feminist Epistemology'' explores feminist empiricism, which asserts that the problem with scientific inquiry lies not in its standards but in the fact that it fails to meet its own standards; Harding also examines the more radical feminist standpoint theories, which claim that what a culture calls ``knowledge'' is itself socially situated, that knowledge looks different from the standpoint of women's lives. ``Reinventing Ourselves as Other,'' while regarding women as science's post-modern ``other,'' approaches ``the Monster Problem: what does and should it mean to be a male feminist?''

Copyright 1991 Cahners Business Information, Inc.

Product Details

• Paperback: 319 pages
• Publisher: Cornell University Press; 1 edition (June 1991)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0801497469
• ISBN-13: 978-0801497469
• Product Dimensions: 9 x 6.1 x 0.8 inches
• Shipping Weight: 1 pounds (View shipping rates and policies)
• Average Customer Review: 3.0 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (4 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #693,335 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

4.0 out of 5 stars Good example of feminist philosophy of science, October 20, 2009

By	Edward Mariyani-Squire (Sydney, Australia) - See all my reviews

A feminist critique of the mainstream themes in the philosophy of science. Argues for a 'stand-point' approach, which entails the explicit incorporation of value-judgements into science and giving greater weight to the 'subjects' of study in social science. It is argued that by taking the stand-point of the subjective and lived-experiences of the oppressed into one's theories and practices, one's understanding of social phenomena can be both more 'objective' (in a special sense) and potentially empancipatory.

12 of 20 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Wonderful and needed critical thinking, February 5, 2002

By	Sage Radachowsky (Boston, Mass) - See all my reviews (REAL NAME)

I've struggled with issues in my attempts to operate within the domain of "science" (soiology) - and I have formulated many critiques on my own, and then I came across this book, which gave me a vocabulary of critique and connected a lot of the thoughts I had been having, with new ones. Harding's work is original, fair, and very thought-provoking. It's a deconstruction of the concept of "objectivity" as it often is understood (implicitly) by practitioners of science. She explains that supposedly "value-free" science is actually very much situated and biased. She offers the beginnings of a new paradigm or epistemology, which she calls "strong objectivity". This is a mode of knowledge production that is more self-aware of its own situatedness, and, for this, generates more reliable, more responsible and more useful knowledge.

16 of 38 people found the following review helpful:

1.0 out of 5 stars pseudointellectual babble, January 9, 2004

By A Customer

I always use this book as an example of what's wrong with much of the humanities. I hope people who take this stuff seriously take the time to read some rebuttals. The fact that "truth" is a philosophically difficult concept really doesn't in any way change the spectacular achievements of the scientific method. That most of the foundations of science were built by white males is a historical accident. The discoverers of deep science may have benefited from a twisted social order, but the whole world has benefited from their work. More to the point, Maxwell's equations or Newton's laws would not be substantially different if discovered by a Balinese woman, they would just have a different name. No amount of pseudointellectual babble will change that. It's, sorry, a fact.