Elisabeth Lloyd is a philosophical author, who wrote “Feminism as a Method: What Scientists Get That Philosophers Don’t”. In her book, Lloyd discusses the impact that the role feminism, the philosophy about women, has in scientific research. Lloyd’s position is that feminism can be and should be a significant key and role in making scientific research objective and rigorous. Going along these lines, this means that the influence of feminism on scientific methods is an example about how particular and value-laden perspectives should influence scientific inquiry. I agree and support Lloyd’s position because of her shown research on social and political problems involving feminism. I believe that feminism needs to play a part in making sure the
…show more content…
She begins by saying, “Over the past quarter century, feminist have had a substantial impact across a range of disciplines within science” (Lloyd 193). With primatology, she explains that because of feminism, female animals became more of a vocal point for research instead of what they were-- unimportant background characters. Lloyd’s other feminist contribution (which I believe is of greater importance) is the movement of change for women’s health standards. This began when feminist demanded for records and access of clinical research, and the effect of their actions has prompted “changes in medical practices surrounding everything from cardiac care to psychiatric diagnoses to obstetric and gynecological practice” (Lloyd 195). These feminist found out that medicine being tested was predominately for masculine roles, which I think is appalling because why are men getting the correct medical help while women aren’t taken accountable for? The leading cause of death for men and women Americans is cardiovascular disease. With much documenting and research, it turns out that the research for medicine of this disease was “exclusively for men” (Lloyd 195). I think that this is absurd because men and women’s bodies are completely different bodies! There’s a big difference with our metabolisms and hormones in comparison to men, and it is unknown what causes it …show more content…
What Lloyd is actually trying to say is: rather that science will be better science if it has more feminist or referees. For example, in a sporting event with referees, the referees may favor a team, but they still have to ref the game. This example applies with objectivity-- objectivity still has the same goal (answerable to the world), but the conception about how human beings obtain that goal is different; we can’t do it by following methods, so now we need a community of scientists to see things from different perspectives. The same applies with scientist-- they can be good people, but not every scientist is unbiased. After Lloyd states her opinion, she gives objections to her ideas. In section 4.1 of her book, Lloyd talks about the feminist ideology, the belief system. Lloyd objection is that “feminist formulate and evaluate specific scientific claims by having their ideological commitments override standard scientific goals of discovering truth. That is, feminist use ideological criteria in place of scientific criteria” (Lloyd 198). The starting belief is that scientist aren’t using ideology for their start. Lloyd would say that before what became known as the feminist movement, men were viewed as more superior to women. Men mostly research for their own masculine research. The effect of this is that women’s rights are pushed aside. All scientist would
She begins by saying, “Over the past quarter century, feminist have had a substantial impact across a range of disciplines within science” (Lloyd 193). With primatology, she explains that because of feminism, female animals became more of a vocal point for research instead of what they were-- unimportant background characters. Lloyd’s other feminist contribution (which I believe is of greater importance) is the movement of change for women’s health standards. This began when feminist demanded for records and access of clinical research, and the effect of their actions has prompted “changes in medical practices surrounding everything from cardiac care to psychiatric diagnoses to obstetric and gynecological practice” (Lloyd 195). These feminist found out that medicine being tested was predominately for masculine roles, which I think is appalling because why are men getting the correct medical help while women aren’t taken accountable for? The leading cause of death for men and women Americans is cardiovascular disease. With much documenting and research, it turns out that the research for medicine of this disease was “exclusively for men” (Lloyd 195). I think that this is absurd because men and women’s bodies are completely different bodies! There’s a big difference with our metabolisms and hormones in comparison to men, and it is unknown what causes it …show more content…
What Lloyd is actually trying to say is: rather that science will be better science if it has more feminist or referees. For example, in a sporting event with referees, the referees may favor a team, but they still have to ref the game. This example applies with objectivity-- objectivity still has the same goal (answerable to the world), but the conception about how human beings obtain that goal is different; we can’t do it by following methods, so now we need a community of scientists to see things from different perspectives. The same applies with scientist-- they can be good people, but not every scientist is unbiased. After Lloyd states her opinion, she gives objections to her ideas. In section 4.1 of her book, Lloyd talks about the feminist ideology, the belief system. Lloyd objection is that “feminist formulate and evaluate specific scientific claims by having their ideological commitments override standard scientific goals of discovering truth. That is, feminist use ideological criteria in place of scientific criteria” (Lloyd 198). The starting belief is that scientist aren’t using ideology for their start. Lloyd would say that before what became known as the feminist movement, men were viewed as more superior to women. Men mostly research for their own masculine research. The effect of this is that women’s rights are pushed aside. All scientist would