Week 3-Feminist Philosophy

Week 3-Feminist Philosophy

This week's readings discuss how science interacts with the public. Is science as objective as Western Civilization presents it to be? It might be more complicated than that. These readings suggest that western science may need to consider how their findings affect groups of people based on race, gender, etc. This week's readings brought back memories of my Environmental Sociology class, in which we discussed climate justice as an intersectional issue. 

Karin Backstrand questions the ideal level of civil participation in scientific law-making in her study "Civic Science for Sustainability, which suggests that incorporating democracy into environmental (and otherwise) decisions typically are made by the people it least affects, generally poor people of color. Implementing this integration would build public understanding of science and democratize a currently dominated field. 

In "The Missing Factor in STS"  Eulalia Sedeno posirs that Scientific and Technology Studies (STS) literature excludes social context such as gender and race. Furthermore, the scientific field is overwhelmingly male-dominated. In other words, gender is dismissed in the science community. Ecofeminism demands an integration of science and the consideration of marginalized groups. 

Situated Knowledges displays an ecofeminist perspective on the integration of science and civilization. Donna Haraway questions the objectivity we are taught to exist in modern-day science and history classes, which are taught through a Western lens. "History is a story Western culture buffs tell each other; science is a contestable text and a power field; the content is the form." Is the Western lens truly objective? She posits that most "science" is not executing using the Scientific Method, which is what we are taught in grade school.