Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-g8tfn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T12:47:46.780Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Why Should a Knower Care?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 March 2020

Vrinda Dalmiya
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper argues that the concept of care is significant not only for ethics, but for epistemology as well. After elucidating caring as a five-step dyadic relation, I go on to show its epistemic significance within the general framework of virtue epistemology as developed by Ernest Sosa, Alvin Goldman, and Linda Zagzebski. The notions of “care-knowing” and “care-based epistemology” emerge from construing caring (respectively) as a reliabilist and responsibilist virtue.

Information

Type
Preface
Information
Hypatia , Volume 17 , Issue 1 , Winter 2002 , pp. 34 - 52
Copyright
Copyright © 2002 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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Axtell, Guy. 1997. Recent work on virtue epistemology. American Philosophical Quarterly 34: 1–26.Google Scholar
Baier, Annette. 1982. The importance of what we care about: A reply to Frankfurt. Synthese 53: 273–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Braaten, Jane. 1990. Towards a feminist reassessment of intellectual virtue. Hypatia 5 (3): 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Card, Claudia. 1991. Feminist ethics. Kansas: University of Kansas Press.Google Scholar
Code, Lorraine. 1987. Epistemic responsibility. Hanover, N.H.: University Press of New England.Google Scholar
Code, Lorraine. 1994. Responsibility and rhetoric. Hypatia 9 (1): 1–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Code, Lorraine. 1995. Rhetorical spaces. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Dancy, Jonathan, and Sosa, Ernest eds., 1992. A companion to epistemology. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Darwall, Stephen. 1998. Empathy, sympathy, care. Philosophical Studies 89 (2‐3):262–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies, Martin. 1994. The mental simulation debate. In Objectivity, simulation and the unity of consciousness, ed. Peacocke, Christopher. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Davies, Martin, and Stone, Tony eds., 1995. Mental simulation. UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Frankfurt, Harry. 1982. The importance of what we care about. Synthese 53: 257–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garry, Ann, and Pearsall, Marilyn eds., 1989. Women, knowledge and reality: Explorations in feminist philosophy. Boston: Unwin Hyman.Google Scholar
Gilligan, Carol. 1982. In a different voice. Cambridge: Harvard University.Google Scholar
Goldman, Alvin. 1992. Epistemic folkways and scientific epistemology. In Liaisons: Philosophy meets the cognitive and social sciences. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Goldman, Alvin. 1995. Empathy, mind and morals. In Mental simulation, eds. Davies, Martin and Stone, Tony. UK: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Greco, John. 1992. Virtue epistemology. In A companion to epistemology, eds. Dancy, Jonathan and Sosa, Ernest. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Hoagland, Sarah Lucia. 1991. Some thoughts about “caring.” In Feminist ethics, ed. Card, Claudia. Lawrence, Kansas: University of Kansas Press.Google Scholar
Hume, David. 1975. A Treatise of Human Nature. Ed. Selby‐Bigge, L. A. and Nidditch, P. H.Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Lugones, Maria C. 1989. Playfulness, “world”‐travelling, and loving perception. In Women, Knowledge and reality: Explorations in feminist philosophy, ed. Garry, Ann and Pearsall, Marilyn. Boston: Unwin Hyman.Google Scholar
Lugones, Maria C. 1991. On the logic of pluralist feminism. In Feminist ethics, ed. Card, Claudia. Kansas: University of Kansas Press.Google Scholar
Lugones, Maria, and Spelman, Elizabeth V. 1993. Have we got a theory for you? Feminist theory, cultural imperialism and the demand for “the women's voice.” In Women and values, ed. Pearsall, Marilyn. Belmont: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
MacIntyre, Alisdair. 1999. Dependent rational animals. Chicago: Open Court.Google Scholar
Noddings, Nel. 1984. Caring: A feminist approach to ethics and moral education. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Peacocke, Christopher. 1994. Objectivity. simulation and the unity of consciousness. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Pearsall, Marilyn, ed. 1993. Women and values. Belmont: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Scheman, Naomi. 1993. On sympathy. In Engenderings: Constructions of knowledge, authority and privilege. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Sevenhuijsen, Selma. 1998. Citizenship and the ethics of care. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Smith, Adam. 1976. The theory of moral sentiments. Ed. Raphael, D. and Mache, A. L.Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Sosa, Ernest. 1991. Knowledge in perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spelman, Elizabeth V. 1988. Now you see her, now you don't. In Inessential woman, ed. Spelman, Elizabeth. Boston: Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Tronto, Joan. 1993. Moral boundaries: A political argument for an ethic of care. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Young, Iris Marion. 1997. Intersecting voices: Dilemmas of gender, political philosophy and policy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Zagzebski, Linda Trinkaus. 1996. Virtues of the mind: An inquiry into the nature of virtues and the ethical foundations of knowledge. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar