Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-55597f9d44-2qt69 Total loading time: 0.43 Render date: 2022-08-15T01:22:25.440Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "useRatesEcommerce": false, "useNewApi": true } hasContentIssue true

Article contents

From Aperspectival Objectivity to Strong Objectivity: The Quest for Moral Objectivity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2020

Abstract

Sandra Harding is working on the reconstruction of scientific objectivity. Lorraine Daston argues that objectivity is a concept that has historically evolved. Her account of the development of “aperspectival objectivity” provides an opportunity to see Harding's “strong objectivity” project as a stage in this evolution, to locate it in the history of migration of ideals from moral philosophy to natural science, and to support Harding's desire to retain something of the ontological significance of objectivity.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © 1997 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abir‐Am, Pnina G. and Outram, Dorrinda, eds. 1989. Uneasy careers and intimate lives: Women in science, 17891979. New Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
Addelson, Kathryn Pyne. 1983. The man of professional wisdom. In Discovering reality. See Harding and Hintikka 1983.Google Scholar
Alcoff, Linda and Potter, Elizabeth, eds. 1993. Feminist epistemoiogies. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bar On, Bat‐Ami. 1993. Marginality and epistemic privilege. In Feminist epistemoiogies. See Alcoff and Potter 1993a.Google Scholar
Benjamin, Marina, ed. 1991. Science and sensibility: Gender and scientific enquiry, 1780‐‐1945. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bernstein, Richard J. 1983. Beyond objectivism and relativism: Science, hermenetirics, and praxis. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bordo, Susan R. 1987. The flight to objectivity: Essays on cartesianism and culture. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Bullough, Vern L., ed. 1978. The scientific revolution. Huntington: Krieger.Google Scholar
Campbell, Richmond. 1994. The virtues of feminist empiricism. Hypatia 9(1): 90115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chalmers, Alan. 1990. Science and its fabrication. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Clarke, D.M. 1994. Epistemology and the sociology of scientific knowledge. Annals of Science 51(2): 177–83.Google Scholar
Code, Lorraine. 1991. What can she know? Feminist theory and the construction of knowledge. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Code, Lorraine. 1994. Who cares? The poverty of objectivism for a moral epistemology. In Rethinking objectivity. See Megill 1994.Google Scholar
Conway, Daniel W. 1993. Das Weib an sich: The slave revolt in epistemology. In Nietzsche, feminism and political theory. See Patton 1993.Google Scholar
Crasnow, Sharon L. 1993. Can science be objective? Longino's Science as social knowledge. Hypatia 8(3): 194201.Google Scholar
Currie, Gregory. 1993. On the road to antirealism. Inquiry 36(4): 465–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daston, Lorraine. 1991. The ideal and reality of the republic of letters in the Enlightenment. Science in Context 4(2): 367–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daston, Lorraine. 1992. Objectivity and the escape from perspective. Social Studies of Science 22: 597618.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daston, Lorraine. 1994. Baconian facts, academic civility, and the prehistory of objectivity. In Rethinking objectivity. See Megill 1994.Google Scholar
Daston, Lorraine and Galison, Peter. 1992. The image of objectivity. Representations 40: 81128. Special Issue: Seeing Science.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dear, Peter. 1992. From truth to disinterestedness in the seventeenth century. Social Studies of Science 22: 619–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dubos, Rene. 1961. The dreams of reason: Science and Utopias. New York: Columbia University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fee, Elizabeth. 1981. Is feminism a threat to scientific objectivity? International Journal of Women's Studies 4(4): 378–92.Google ScholarPubMed
Gatens, Moira. 1991. Feminism, philosophy, and riddles without answers. In A Reader in Feminist Knowledge. See Gunew 1991.Google Scholar
Grosz, Elizabeth. 1987. Feminist theory and the challenge to knowledges. Women's Studies International Forum 10(5): 475–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gunew, Sneja, ed. 1991. A Reader in Feminist Knowledge. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Haraway, Donna J. 1989. Primate visions: Gender, race, and nature in die world of modern science. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Haraway, Donna J. 1991. Simians, cyborgs, and women: The reinvention of nature. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Harding, Jan, ed. 1986. Perspectives on gender and science. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
Harding, Sandra. 1986. The science question in feminism. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Harding, Sandra. 1989. Is there a feminist method?. In Feminism and science. See Tuana 1989.Google Scholar
Harding, Sandra. 1991. Whose science? Whose knowledge?: Thinking from women's lives. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Harding, Sandra. 1993. Rethinking standpoint epistemology: What is “strong objectivity”? In Feminist epistemologies. See Alcoff and Potter 1993a.Google Scholar
Harding, Sandra. 1994a. Address to Philosophy Club. University of Queensland. Brisbane, 10 June.Google Scholar
Harding, Sandra. 1994b. After the neutrality ideal: Science, politics, and “strong objectivity”. In The politics of western science. 1640‐‐1990. See Jacob 1994.Google Scholar
Harding, Sandra and Hintikka, Merrill B., eds. 1983. Discovering reality: Feminist perspectives on epistemology, metaphysics, methodology, and philosophy of science. Dordrecht: Reidel.Google Scholar
Harding, Sandra and O'Barr, Jean F., eds. 1987. Sex and scientific inquiry. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Hartsock, Nancy C. M. 1983. The feminist standpoint: Developing the ground for a specifically feminist historical materialism. In Discovering reality. See Harding and Hintikka 1983.Google Scholar
Harvey, Louise. 1989. The post‐modernist turn in feminist philosophy of science. Arenali 88:119–33.Google Scholar
Hawkesworth, Mary E. 1990. Reply to Hekman. Signs 15(21): 420–23.Google Scholar
Hawkesworth, Mary E. 1994. From objectivity to objectification: Feminist objections. In Rethinking objectivity. See Megill 1994.Google Scholar
Hekman, Susan. 1990. Comment on Hawkesworth's “Knowers, knowing, known: Feminist theory and claims of truth.” Signs 15(21): 417–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hennessy, Rosemary. 1993. Women's lives/Feminist knowledge: Feminist standpoint as ideology critique, Hypatia 8(1): 1434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirsch, Marianne and Keller, Evelyn Fox, eds. 1990. Conflicts in feminism. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hrdy, Sarah Blaffer. 1981. The woman that never evolved. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Jacob, Margaret C., ed. 1994. The politics of western science. 1640‐‐1990. Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press.Google Scholar
Jordanova, Ludmilla. 1993. Gender and the historiography of science. British Journal for the History of Science 26: 469–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kant, Immanuel. [1781] 1991. Critique of pure reason. Trans.Meiklejohn, J. M. D.London: Dent.Google Scholar
Keller, Evelyn Fox. 1987. Feminism and science. In Sex and scientific inquiry. See Harding and O'Barr 1987.Google Scholar
Kelly, Farley, ed. 1993. On the edge of discovery: Australian women in science. Melbourne: Text Publishing.Google Scholar
Knight, D. 1967. Sir Humphrey Daveyo, 1778‐‐1829. In Early nineteenth‐century European scientists. See Olby 1967.Google Scholar
Komesaroff, P. A. 1986. Objectivity, science and society: Interpreting nature and society in the age of the crisis of science. London: Routledge and Kegal Paul.Google Scholar
Laudan, Larry. 1984. Science and values: The aims of science and their role in scientific debate. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Laudan, Larry. 1990. Science and relativism: Some key controversies in the philosophy of science. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Longino, Helen E. 1989. Can there be a feminist science? In Feminism and science. See Tuana 1989.Google Scholar
Longino, Helen E. 1990. Science as social knowledge: Values and objectivity in scientific inquiry. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Longino, Helen E. 1993. Subjects, power and knowledge: Description and prescription in feminist philosophies of science. In Feminist epistemologies. See Alcoff and Potter 1993a.Google Scholar
Longino, Helen E. and Hammonds, Evelynn. 1990. Conflicts and tensions in the feminist study of gender and science. In Conflicts infeminism. See Hirsch and Keller 1990.Google Scholar
McCaughey, Martha. 1993. Redirecting feminist critiques of science. Hypatia 8(4): 7284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Megill, Allan, ed. 1994. Rethinking objectivity. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, Lynn Hankinson. 1993. Epistemological communities. In Feminist epistemologies. See Alcoff and Potter 1993a.Google Scholar
Nola, Robert. 1994. Post‐modernism, a French cultural Chernobyl: Foucault on power/knowledge. Inquiry 37(1): 343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Olby, R. D., ed. 1967. Early nineteenth‐century European scientists. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
Outram, Dorrinda. 1978. The language of natural power: The “eloges” of Georges Cuvier and the public language of nineteenth‐century science. History of Science 16: 153178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Outram, Dorrinda. 1989. Before objectivity: Wives, patronage, and cultural reproduction in early nineteenth‐century French science. In Uneasy careers and intimate lives: Women in science, 1789‐‐1979. See Abir‐Am and Outram 1989.Google Scholar
Outram, Dorrinda. 1991. Fat, gorillas and misogyny: Women's history in science. British Journal for the History of Science 24(3)(82): 361–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Overend, Tronn. 1983. Social idealism and the problem of objectivity. St. Lucia: University of Queensland Press.Google Scholar
Patton, Paul, ed. 1993. Nietzsche, feminism and political theory. St. Leonards, Australia: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Popper, Karl R. 1969. Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge. London: Routledge and Kegal Paul.Google Scholar
Popper, Karl R. 1979. Objective knowledge. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ring, J. 1987. Saving objectivity for feminism: MacKinnon, Marx, and other possibilities. Review of Politics 49(4): 467–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rooney, Phyllis. 1993. Feminist‐pragmatist revisionings of reason, knowledge, and philosophy. Hypatia 8(2): 1537.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rose, Hilary. 1987. Hand, brain, and heart: A feminist epistemology for the natural sciences. In Sex and scientific inquiry. See Harding and O'Barr 1987.Google Scholar
Rosenau, Pauline. 1992. Modern and post‐modern science: Some contrasts. Review 15(1): 4989.Google Scholar
Ruddick, Sarah. 1993. New feminist work on knowledge. Hypatia 8(4): 140–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Santillana, Georgio. 1978. The crime of Galileo (excerpted from book of same title). In The scientific revolution. See Bullough 1978.Google Scholar
Scheffler, I. 1967. Science and subjectivity. Indianapolis: Bobbs‐Merrill.Google Scholar
Scheffler, Samuel. 1990. Objectivity. London Review of Books 12(17)(13 September): 910.Google Scholar
Searle, John R. 1993. Rationality and realism, what is at stake? Daedalus 122(4): 5583.Google Scholar
Sells, Laura. 1993. Feminist epistemology: Rethinking the dualisms of atomic knowledge. Hypatia 8(3): 202–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapin, Steven. 1988. The house of experiment in seventeenth‐century England, Isis 79:373404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shapin, Steven. 1992. Discipline and bounding: The history and sociology of science as seen through the externalism‐internalism debate. History of Science 30(4)(90)(December): 333–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, Adam. (1759) 1976. The Theory of Moral Sentiments. ed.Raphael, D. D. and Macfie., A. L. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanley, Liz and Wise, Sue. 1993. Breaking out again: Feminist ontology and epistemobgy. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Stokes, Geoff. 1991. Objectivity and the open society: The public sphere in Karl Popper's theory of science. Paper presented to Australasian Association for the History, Philosophy and Social Studies of Science Conference, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia, 11 July.Google Scholar
Tuana, Nancy, ed. 1989. Feminism and science. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Tullock, Gail. 1993. Feminism and ethics. Paper presented to Feminism and Ethics Conference, Australian National University, Canberra, February.Google Scholar
Van Fraassen, B. C. 1980. The scientific image. Oxford: Clarendon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vaux, Janet. 1994. Great experiments in philosophy. New Scientist 14 May: 4849.Google Scholar
Welton, Tinka. 1994. Feminist critiques of objectivity. Paper presented to AAHPSSS Conference, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia, 12 July.Google Scholar
Afshar, Haleh, ed. 1996. Women and politics in the third world. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Agrippa, Henricus Cornelius. 1996. Declamation on the nobility and preeminence of the female sex. Trans, and ed., Rabil, Albert Jr. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belán, Kyra. 1996. Earth, spirit and gender: Visual language for the New Reality. New York: American Heritage.Google Scholar
Belenky, Mary Field, McVicker Clinchy, Blythe, Rule Goldberg, Nancy, and Tarule, Jill Mattuck, eds. 1996. Knowledge, difference, and power: Essays inspired by women's ways of knowing. New York: BasicBooks.Google Scholar
Bergoffen, Debra B. 1997. The philosophy of Simone de Beauvoir: Gendered phenomenologies, erotic generosities. New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Boling, Patricia. 1996. Privacy and the politics of intimate life. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Care, Norman S. 1996. Living with one's past: Personal fates and moral pain. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.Google Scholar
Chase, Candice, ed. 1996. Metis: A Journal of Feminist Transformative Wisdom. San Francisco: California Institute of Integral Studies.Google Scholar
Cooper, Kate. 1996. The virgin and the bride. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Cottingham, Laura. 1996. Lesbians are so chic … that we are not really lesbians at all. New York: Cassell Academic.Google Scholar
DeShell, Jeffery, Mazza, Cris, and Sheffield, Elisabeth, eds. 1996. Chick‐Lit 2: No Chick Vies. USA: National Endowment for the Arts.Google Scholar
Gilbert, Margaret. 1996. Living together: Rationality, sociality, and Obligation. Lanham MD: Rowman and Lillefield.Google Scholar
Gordon, Suzanne, Benner, Patricia, and Noddings, Nel, eds. 1996. Caregiving: Readings in knowledge, practice, ethics and politics. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Guberman, Ross Mitchell, ed. 1996. Julia Kristeva interviews. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Hammonds, Evelynn, Gregory Kohlstedt, Sally, Laslett, Barbara, and Longino, Helen, eds. 1996. Gender and scientific authority. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Harne, Lynne and Miller, Elaine, eds. 1996. All the rage: Reasserting radical lesbian feminism. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
Hekman, Susan, ed. 1996. Feminist Interpretations of Michel Foucault. Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State Press.Google Scholar
Hirschman, Nancy J., and Stefano, Christine Di, eds. 1996. Revisioning the political: Feminist reconstructions of traditional concepts in western political theory. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Isaak, Jo Anna. 1996. Feminism and contemporary art: The revolutionary power of women's laughter. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Jackson, Stevi and Scott, Sue, eds. 1996. Feminism and sexuality. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
James, Joy. 1996. Resisting state violence: Radicalism, gender and race in U.S. culture. Foreword by Angela Y. Davis. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Jensen, Pamela Grande, ed. 1996. Finding a new feminism: Rethinking the woman question for liberal democracy. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Joeres, Ruth‐Ellen B., and Laslett, Barbara, eds. 1996. The second Signs reader: Feminist scholarship, 1983‐‐1996. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Keller, Catherine. 1996. Apocalypse now and then: A feminist approach to the end of the world. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Lamb, Roger E., ed. 1997. Love analyzed. Boulder CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Lewin, Ellen, ed. 1996. Inventing lesbian cultures in America. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Lindsay, Peter. 1996. Creative individualism: The democratic vision of C.B. MacPherson. New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Maglin, Nan Bauer, and Perry, Donna, eds. 1996. Bad girls good girls: Women, sex, and power in the nineties. New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
May, Larry, Strikwerda, Robert, and Hopkins, Patrick D., eds. 1996. Rethinking masculinity: Philosophical explorations in light of feminism, 2nd ed. Maryland: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Meyers, Diana Tietjens, ed. 1997. Feminists rethink the self. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Morganstern, Mira. 1996. Rousseau and the politics of ambiguity: Self, culture, and society. Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania State Press.Google Scholar
Moscovici, Claudia. 1996. Erotisms. Maryland: University Press of America.Google Scholar
Moskowitz, Ellen H., and Jennings, Bruce, eds. 1996. Coerced contraception? Moral and policy challenges of long‐acting birth control. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
O'Sullivan, Sue. 1996. I used to be nice: Sexual affairs. New York: Cassell.Google Scholar
Popper, Karl R. 1994. The myth of the framework. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Roof, Judith. 1996. Come as you are. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Scruton, Roger. 1996. A short history of modern philosophy: From Descartes to Wittgenstein. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Soble, Alan. 1996. Sexual investigations. New York: New York University Press.Google Scholar
Stambaugh, Joan, trans. 1996. Being and time: A translation of Sein und Zeit, by Heidegger, Martin. New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Straayer, Chris. 1996. Deviant eyes, deviant bodies. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Stuart, Elizabeth. 1996. Just good friends: Towards a lesbain and gay theology of relationships. New York: Cassell Academic.Google Scholar
Studlar, Gaylyn. 1996. This mad masquerade: Stardom and masculinity in the Jazz Age. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Sullivan, Patricia A., and Turner, Lynn H., eds. 1996. From the margins to the center: Contemporary women and political communication. Westport CT: Praeger Publishers.Google Scholar
Thompson, Becky W. 1996. A hunger so wide and so deep: A multiracial view of women's eating problems. Minneapolis: University Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
Tsomo, Karma Lekshe. 1996. Sisters in solitude: Two traditions of Buddhist monastic ethics for women. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Vintges, Karen. 1996. Philosophy as passion: The thinking of Simone deBeauvoir. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Warburton, Nigel. 1996. Philosophy: The basics. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wear, Delese, ed. 1996. Women in medical education: An anthology of experience. New York: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Wendell, Susan. 1996. The rejected body: Feminist philosophical reflections on disability. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
West, Angela. 1996. Deadly innocence: Feminism and the mythology of sin. New York: Cassell Academic.Google Scholar
5
Cited by

Save article to Kindle

To save this article to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

From Aperspectival Objectivity to Strong Objectivity: The Quest for Moral Objectivity
Available formats
×

Save article to Dropbox

To save this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Dropbox account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

From Aperspectival Objectivity to Strong Objectivity: The Quest for Moral Objectivity
Available formats
×

Save article to Google Drive

To save this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you used this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your Google Drive account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

From Aperspectival Objectivity to Strong Objectivity: The Quest for Moral Objectivity
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *