Feminism Vs Postmodernism

Improved Essays
Feminist philosophy of science and its related epistemology, concerns scientific inquiry and the extent to which theories and knowledge are influenced and shaped by bias within the scientific community, and the means to rectify this. There are three main distinctions of feminist philosophy of science; empiricism, standpoint theory, and postmodernism. I am to be comparing and contrasting two of the three; namely feminist standpoint theory and postmodernism. Both of these distinctions are intriguing, if somewhat extreme and conflicting views, in their own right. I shall argue that ______.
The feminist philosophy of science is rooted in studying an analysing discourse and knowledge that is harmful and not conducive to attaining an impartial interpretation
…show more content…
It follows that, with completely different social constructs, according to postmodernism, there is nothing wrong for such communities to have overarching, though conflicting views about a particular theory. To see why this is the case we must consider what constitutes a correct and accepted theory within a group. If it is the case that communities have separate social constructs and contrasting opinions, there is nothing to say that nothing is wrong, or, conversely, nothing is right. What is left is an undefined, incomplete view of the world which says that anything and everything, conflicting views or not, is all the same, and whether a community ascribes to one particular construct of the world, concurrently, is relative. That is also to say, relative to a community, there is defined the concepts of True and False, and dependent on how well a scientific theory matches to such defined attributes, determines to what extent it is True and False, respectively. Thus, if Truth is itself relative, what conclusions ought there to be drawn about seemingly concrete (and less concrete) truths within science if such scientific knowledge is illusory and subjective? Science, according to postmodernism is hence …show more content…
To say that much of knowledge is socially constructed and socially situated certainly rings true. Yet, denying the existence of a ‘true’ reality is perplexing. If there were no objective reality, how can there be the experience
Both standpoint theory and postmodernism assure that, in general, science would benefit from, and requires, a somewhat neutral, and less

Related Documents

  • Improved Essays

    Falsificationism Karl Popper asserts that the scientific status of a theory is derived from that theories potential for refutation. Theories outlining experimental results that (if observed) could refute the theory are classified as scientific. Theories that lack this content are classified as pseudoscience. Popper uses this distinction to preface his scientific view: falsificationism. Under this view, science exists as a system through which we can logically falsify theories.…

    • 820 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Popper discusses that it is an issue when someone considers pseudoscience to be a science. With pseudoscience, people often times support their theories by looking for confirmations instead of trying to test them for falsifiability. This happens because pseudoscience deals a lot with things that cannot be actively observed or measured. (199-202) Though these two are different, both science and pseudoscience hold great values towards an individual 's life. Nonetheless, I place more value in science than in myth.…

    • 1523 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Secondly, Karl Popper thinks that if science had followed an induction path, it would not have made such progress. An example case would be described when a scientist arrives at a generalization. If she/ he follows the induction method, he or she will go in search of instances which establish it as truth. If he/ she finds an instance which conflicts with her/ his generalization and establishment, then the scientist is required to qualify the generalization mentioning that the generalization is really true except, in the cases where it has been held to be false or rather unsupported. The type of such qualifications imposes heavy limitations and curtailment restrictions on the scope of the generalization.…

    • 1356 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Through such structured methodology, a concept becomes a theory, and a theory can then become a law. Within the natural sciences, skepticism is crucial to negate researcher bias. Certain scientists may not recognize errors in their own experiments, but another person may easily perceive such faults. Through additional observation, other scientists can largely falsify theories and further scientific knowledge. For example, falsification led to the direct acceptance of the Bohr…

    • 1521 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Philosophers continue to revisit these ideas, supporting their initial claims and making counter arguments to rebuttals. While realism supports the idea that science is based on facts and the truth, using scientific theories to accurately depict the world, anti-realism claims that the purpose of science is to find theories that are empirically correct due to one’s own observations of the physical world. Ultimately, the debate of realism and anti-realism concern the aim of science, trying to discover why scientists perform certain actions opposed to others as a result of their individual beliefs. It comprises of the nature of scientific knowledge, how we can attain and are limited by it, and the overall interpretation of the scientific enterprise. Inconsistencies can be highlighted in both arguments, however, both embrace a certain truth if observed through an unbiased perspective.…

    • 1509 Words
    • 7 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    It is definitely possible to agree with both Carnap and Popper’s ways of demarcation as a theory can be both verifiable and falsifiable. Carnap senses that only experience can tell us the knowledge imbedded in the world of phenomena (as described by Kant). In order to access the truth of this world, Carnap came up with a criteria of theory choice and demarcation which is required to evaluate competing scientific theories and deduct the ones that are better or worse. Here, Carnap introduced verificationism, to see if a principle is scientific or not. A theory is scientific if it is…

    • 720 Words
    • 3 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    Positivism is said to evaluate the use of critical realism using their own criteria instead of the core theory. They argue that critical realism fails to test knowledge claims about causes effectively, however this is based on the positivist theory that scientific knowledge requires evaluation to be…

    • 814 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Great Essays

    To conclude similar outcomes were achieved through evidence-based and non-evidence based therapies. CBT does not have the grounds of coherent scientific rationale; there is no doubting BA has a scientific basis. Does science matter in psychotherapy? If not for science and scientific EBP we risk repeating the inevitable mistakes of the past (e.g.,…

    • 1328 Words
    • 6 Pages
    Great Essays
  • Improved Essays

    This principle states that a theory is scientific if there are ways for one to test it through observations or experiments that would either support or contradict the theory. The last notion, a theory’s ability to be contradicted by results is what allows one to accept both Carnap’s and Popper’s demarcation criteria. Similarly to Popper’s criteria of demarcation, one can essentially seek ways to disprove a scientific theory if he chooses to do so. This is an instance in which one’s stance of the demarcation is flexible and is able to accept some part of either criterion. To illustrate this concept, an example from the history of astronomy can be utilized.…

    • 1135 Words
    • 5 Pages
    Improved Essays
  • Improved Essays

    2. How does Kuhn 's view differ from Popper 's view of science? Kuhn 's view differs from Popper 's view of science in the way of scientific method. Popper sets a very high standard for scientific method by the principle of demarcation and criticism. According to Popper, any theory can be proven false through empirical evidence or experimental data but cannot be proven true.…

    • 944 Words
    • 4 Pages
    Improved Essays