-
Science as Social Knowledge
The objectivity of science can be reconciled with its cultural and social construction. Science conformity to standards of rationality that are independent of specific social/cultural values does not guarantee that science is independent of those values.
Social values affect research programs. For eg. autonomy and gender roles affect research programs on the basis of behaviors and cognition. Engaging feminists in science could make science more inclusive and thus more objective (Schmaus, 1993). -
Feminist epistemology: [1994-1996]
1.Feminist epistemology should not distinctively seek a feminist mode of inquiry.
2. Feminist epistemology should include epistemological projects engaged with a feminist sensibility.
3. Feminist epistemology should be referred to as doing epistemology as a feminist.
4. Female figures are engaged in science as a contingent resource (object of reflection) that can provide critical insights about theories of knowledge not as a distinctive subject position (Wylie, 1995). -
Social nature of objectivity [1990;2002]
Objectivity is social as it is dependent on the critical interactions in the community.
Scientific knowledge and objectivity are a property of the community .
Peer reviews are hypotheses based on data requiring perspectival diversity on the norms and beliefs of the culture (Eigi, 2015).
Same phenomenon may assume different forms outcome (Rotman Institute of Philosophy, 2015). Watch the YouTube video below on “Perspectives and Pluralities”.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=631gObE7ctA -
The fate of knowledge: [2002]
Aimed at bridging the gap between normative and empirical accounts of knowledge by using science that is both epistemological and social (Barberis, 2004).
The premise that cognitive rationality and sociality are mutually exclusive is the source of disagreement between philosophers and sociologists of science.
Knowledge refers to the “who” “what” and “how”
Rationalizers assume that, the processes of producing and justifying knowledge, the “who” and “what” should be construed as rational.