Abstract
It is not easy to ask serious questions about sex and gender in the construction of science. Science is so constructed that the questions keep being transformed into something else. Sometimes into “external” questions about social context. Or into historical questions about bad science in the past (now corrected). Or into questions about suspect sciences like anthropology or primatology, but not real sciences like physics. Or into political questions about equal opportunity. Or perhaps into the ravings of Marxists and Feminists. It is particularly difficult to ask serious questions about sex and gender in philosophy of science, because of the ways in which its scholars have reconstructed science.In “Primatology Is Politics by Other Means”, Donna Haraway talks about sex and gender so as to reformulate the way we talk about science. As I read her paper, there are two main investigatory concepts she uses. One is “social organization”.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
