Reading groups
Information about our reading groups
|
Pragmatism and feminism in philosophy of science
EENPS reading group [2025]
Graphics by Joanna Karolina Malinowska
Dear members,
We are pleased to announce that the EENPS is organising an online reading group on pragmatism and feminism in philosophy of science.
The sessions are planned to last one hour, but if there are additional questions and concerns we can also take some additional time to answer them.
To join, please email Elena Popa [[email protected]] and Christoph Merdes [[email protected]] by January 1st. We will be sharing the readings and the meeting links with you through email.
Schedule of meetings [17:00 to 18:00 CET]
January 20 2025
Seigfried, C. H. (1991). Where are all the pragmatist feminists?. Hypatia, 6(2), 1-20 [main reading for discussion].
Seigfried, C. H. (2022) On Writing Pragmatism and Feminism: Reweaving the Social Fabric (1996) and Its Reception. In Women in Pragmatism: Past, Present and Future. [background reading]
Feb 17 2025
Clough, S. (2011). Radical interpretation, feminism, and science. In Dialogues with Davidson: Acting, Interpreting, Understanding.
March 17 2025
Dieleman, S. (2010). Revisiting Rorty: Contributions to a pragmatist feminism. Hypatia, 25(4), 891-908.
April 14 2025
Miras Boronat, N.S. (2022). Toward a Pragmatist and Feminist Theory of Oppression: Thoughts on Class, Gender, and Race. In Women in Pragmatism: Past, Present and Future.
May 19 2025
Wellan, S.A. (2022) Pragmatism and Scientific Perspectivism. In Women in Pragmatism: Past, Present and Future.
Organisers
Elena Popa
Christoph Merdes
We are pleased to announce that the EENPS is organising an online reading group on pragmatism and feminism in philosophy of science.
The sessions are planned to last one hour, but if there are additional questions and concerns we can also take some additional time to answer them.
To join, please email Elena Popa [[email protected]] and Christoph Merdes [[email protected]] by January 1st. We will be sharing the readings and the meeting links with you through email.
Schedule of meetings [17:00 to 18:00 CET]
January 20 2025
Seigfried, C. H. (1991). Where are all the pragmatist feminists?. Hypatia, 6(2), 1-20 [main reading for discussion].
Seigfried, C. H. (2022) On Writing Pragmatism and Feminism: Reweaving the Social Fabric (1996) and Its Reception. In Women in Pragmatism: Past, Present and Future. [background reading]
Feb 17 2025
Clough, S. (2011). Radical interpretation, feminism, and science. In Dialogues with Davidson: Acting, Interpreting, Understanding.
March 17 2025
Dieleman, S. (2010). Revisiting Rorty: Contributions to a pragmatist feminism. Hypatia, 25(4), 891-908.
April 14 2025
Miras Boronat, N.S. (2022). Toward a Pragmatist and Feminist Theory of Oppression: Thoughts on Class, Gender, and Race. In Women in Pragmatism: Past, Present and Future.
May 19 2025
Wellan, S.A. (2022) Pragmatism and Scientific Perspectivism. In Women in Pragmatism: Past, Present and Future.
Organisers
Elena Popa
Christoph Merdes
Feminist philosophy of science
EENPS reading group [2023-2024]
Dear members,
We are pleased to announce that the EENPS is organising a reading group on Feminist philosophy of science via Zoom (please, contact us for the Zoom link and references).
The first session will took place on February 27th 2023 and the group continues its activities in 2024.
The sessions are planned to last one hour, but if there are additional questions and concerns we can also take some additional time to answer them.
Schedule of meetings [17:00 to 18:00 CET]
2024
29.01.
Urry, C. M. (2008). Are photons gendered. Women in physics and astronomy. In L. Schiebinger (Ed.), Gendered innovations in science and engineering, 150-164.
Prescod-Weinstein, C. (2020). Making Black women scientists under white empiricism: the racialization of epistemology in physics. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 45(2), 421-447.
25.03.
Almassi, B. (2019). Beyond Science Wars Redux: Feminist Philosophy of Science as Trustworthy Science Criticism. Hypatia, 34(4), 858-868.
29.04.
Ch. 19: AI & Structural Injustice: A Feminist Perspective, Jude Browne. In Browne, J., Cave, S., Drage, E., & McInerney, K. (Eds.). (2023). Feminist AI: Critical Perspectives on Algorithms, Data, and Intelligent Machines. Oxford University Press [main reading].
Ch. 8: Techno Racial Capitalism: A Decolonial Black Feminist Marxist Perspective, Lelia Marie Hampton. In Feminist AI volume [background reading].
27.05.
de Melo-Martín, I., & Intemann, K. (2011). Feminist resources for biomedical research: Lessons from the HPV vaccines. Hypatia, 26(1), 79-101 [main reading].
Ch. 2 Epigenetics and Forward-Looking Collective Responsibility, Emma Moorman. In Moormann, E., Smajdor, A., & Cutas, D. (Eds.). (2024). Epigenetics and Responsibility: Ethical Perspectives. Policy Press [background reading].
17.06.
Wylie, A. (2013). Why standpoint matters. In Science and other cultures (pp. 26-48). Routledge [main reading].
ChoGlueck, C., & Lloyd, E. A. (2023). Values as heuristics: a contextual empiricist account of assessing values scientifically. Synthese, 201(6), 220 [background reading].
2023
27.02.
Longino, H. E. (1995). Gender, politics, and the theoretical virtues. Synthese, 104(3), 383-397 [main reading].
Longino, H. (1992). Subjects, power, knowledge: Prescriptivism and descriptivism in feminist philosophy of science. Feminist epistemologies. New York: Routledge [background reading].
Longino, H. E. (1987). Can there be a feminist science?. Hypatia, 2(3), 51-64 [background reading].
13.03.
Haraway, D. (2013). Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective1. In Women, science, and technology (pp. 455-472). Routledge.
Haraway, D. J. (1989). Primate visions: Gender, race, and nature in the world of modern science (excerpts TBD).
27.03.
Harding, S. (2013). Rethinking standpoint epistemology: What is “strong objectivity”?. In Feminist epistemologies (pp. 49-82). Routledge.
Harding, S. (2000). Democratizing philosophy of science for local knowledge movements: issues and challenges. Gender, Technology and Development, 4(1), 1-23.
17.04.
Kourany, J. A. (2003). A philosophy of science for the twenty-first century. Philosophy of science, 70(1), 1-14.
Kourany, J., & Carrier, M. (2020). Might scientific ignorance be virtuous? The case of cognitive differences research. Kourany and Carrier, Science and the Production of Ignorance, 123-43.
15.05.
Anderson, E. (2004). Uses of value judgments in science: A general argument, with lessons from a case study of feminist research on divorce. Hypatia, 19(1), 1-24.
Clough, S. (2020). Using Values as Evidence When There’s Evidence for Your Values. Philosophy in the Contemporary World, 26(1/2), 5-37.
05.06.
Nelson, J. A. (2008). Economists, value judgments, and climate change: a view from feminist economics. Ecological economics, 65(3), 441-447.
Tejani, S. (2019). What’s feminist about feminist economics?. Journal of Economic Methodology, 26(2), 99-117.
One chapter from Ferber, M. A., & Nelson, J. A. (Eds.). (2009). Beyond economic man: Feminist theory and economics. University of Chicago Press. TBD
19.06.
Goldenberg, M. J. (2015). How can feminist theories of evidence assist clinical reasoning and decision-making?. Social Epistemology, 29(1), 3-30.
Ch. 17 Sex and Gender Blind Spots and Biases in Health Research from Venkatapuram, S., & Broadbent, A. (Eds.). (2022). The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Public Health. Taylor & Francis
Sun, T., Plutynski, A., Ward, S., & Rubin, J. B. (2015). An integrative view on sex differences in brain tumors. Cellular and molecular life sciences, 72(17), 3323-3342
25.09.
Richardson, S. S. (2010). Feminist philosophy of science: History, contributions, and challenges. Synthese, 177, 337-362.
30.10.
Longino H. (1990) Chapter 7: 'Explanatory models in the biology of behaviour' In: Science as social knowledge, Princeton University Press
Background reading:
Longino, H. (2016). Foregrounding the background. Philosophy of Science, 83(5), 647-661.
27.11.
Dorfman, N., & Reynolds, J. M. (forthcoming) The New Hysteria: Borderline Personality Disorder and Epistemic Injustice, International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics.
18.12.
Bowleg, Lisa. 2012. "The Problem with the Phrase 'Women and Minorities': Intersectionality—An Important Theoretical Framework for Public Health." American Journal of Public Health 102(7):1267–73.
McCall, Leslie. 2005. "The Complexity of Intersectionality." Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 30(3):1771– 1800.
Organisers
Magdalena Małecka
Elena Popa
We are pleased to announce that the EENPS is organising a reading group on Feminist philosophy of science via Zoom (please, contact us for the Zoom link and references).
The first session will took place on February 27th 2023 and the group continues its activities in 2024.
The sessions are planned to last one hour, but if there are additional questions and concerns we can also take some additional time to answer them.
Schedule of meetings [17:00 to 18:00 CET]
2024
29.01.
Urry, C. M. (2008). Are photons gendered. Women in physics and astronomy. In L. Schiebinger (Ed.), Gendered innovations in science and engineering, 150-164.
Prescod-Weinstein, C. (2020). Making Black women scientists under white empiricism: the racialization of epistemology in physics. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 45(2), 421-447.
25.03.
Almassi, B. (2019). Beyond Science Wars Redux: Feminist Philosophy of Science as Trustworthy Science Criticism. Hypatia, 34(4), 858-868.
29.04.
Ch. 19: AI & Structural Injustice: A Feminist Perspective, Jude Browne. In Browne, J., Cave, S., Drage, E., & McInerney, K. (Eds.). (2023). Feminist AI: Critical Perspectives on Algorithms, Data, and Intelligent Machines. Oxford University Press [main reading].
Ch. 8: Techno Racial Capitalism: A Decolonial Black Feminist Marxist Perspective, Lelia Marie Hampton. In Feminist AI volume [background reading].
27.05.
de Melo-Martín, I., & Intemann, K. (2011). Feminist resources for biomedical research: Lessons from the HPV vaccines. Hypatia, 26(1), 79-101 [main reading].
Ch. 2 Epigenetics and Forward-Looking Collective Responsibility, Emma Moorman. In Moormann, E., Smajdor, A., & Cutas, D. (Eds.). (2024). Epigenetics and Responsibility: Ethical Perspectives. Policy Press [background reading].
17.06.
Wylie, A. (2013). Why standpoint matters. In Science and other cultures (pp. 26-48). Routledge [main reading].
ChoGlueck, C., & Lloyd, E. A. (2023). Values as heuristics: a contextual empiricist account of assessing values scientifically. Synthese, 201(6), 220 [background reading].
2023
27.02.
Longino, H. E. (1995). Gender, politics, and the theoretical virtues. Synthese, 104(3), 383-397 [main reading].
Longino, H. (1992). Subjects, power, knowledge: Prescriptivism and descriptivism in feminist philosophy of science. Feminist epistemologies. New York: Routledge [background reading].
Longino, H. E. (1987). Can there be a feminist science?. Hypatia, 2(3), 51-64 [background reading].
13.03.
Haraway, D. (2013). Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of Partial Perspective1. In Women, science, and technology (pp. 455-472). Routledge.
Haraway, D. J. (1989). Primate visions: Gender, race, and nature in the world of modern science (excerpts TBD).
27.03.
Harding, S. (2013). Rethinking standpoint epistemology: What is “strong objectivity”?. In Feminist epistemologies (pp. 49-82). Routledge.
Harding, S. (2000). Democratizing philosophy of science for local knowledge movements: issues and challenges. Gender, Technology and Development, 4(1), 1-23.
17.04.
Kourany, J. A. (2003). A philosophy of science for the twenty-first century. Philosophy of science, 70(1), 1-14.
Kourany, J., & Carrier, M. (2020). Might scientific ignorance be virtuous? The case of cognitive differences research. Kourany and Carrier, Science and the Production of Ignorance, 123-43.
15.05.
Anderson, E. (2004). Uses of value judgments in science: A general argument, with lessons from a case study of feminist research on divorce. Hypatia, 19(1), 1-24.
Clough, S. (2020). Using Values as Evidence When There’s Evidence for Your Values. Philosophy in the Contemporary World, 26(1/2), 5-37.
05.06.
Nelson, J. A. (2008). Economists, value judgments, and climate change: a view from feminist economics. Ecological economics, 65(3), 441-447.
Tejani, S. (2019). What’s feminist about feminist economics?. Journal of Economic Methodology, 26(2), 99-117.
One chapter from Ferber, M. A., & Nelson, J. A. (Eds.). (2009). Beyond economic man: Feminist theory and economics. University of Chicago Press. TBD
19.06.
Goldenberg, M. J. (2015). How can feminist theories of evidence assist clinical reasoning and decision-making?. Social Epistemology, 29(1), 3-30.
Ch. 17 Sex and Gender Blind Spots and Biases in Health Research from Venkatapuram, S., & Broadbent, A. (Eds.). (2022). The Routledge Handbook of Philosophy of Public Health. Taylor & Francis
Sun, T., Plutynski, A., Ward, S., & Rubin, J. B. (2015). An integrative view on sex differences in brain tumors. Cellular and molecular life sciences, 72(17), 3323-3342
25.09.
Richardson, S. S. (2010). Feminist philosophy of science: History, contributions, and challenges. Synthese, 177, 337-362.
30.10.
Longino H. (1990) Chapter 7: 'Explanatory models in the biology of behaviour' In: Science as social knowledge, Princeton University Press
Background reading:
Longino, H. (2016). Foregrounding the background. Philosophy of Science, 83(5), 647-661.
27.11.
Dorfman, N., & Reynolds, J. M. (forthcoming) The New Hysteria: Borderline Personality Disorder and Epistemic Injustice, International Journal of Feminist Approaches to Bioethics.
18.12.
Bowleg, Lisa. 2012. "The Problem with the Phrase 'Women and Minorities': Intersectionality—An Important Theoretical Framework for Public Health." American Journal of Public Health 102(7):1267–73.
McCall, Leslie. 2005. "The Complexity of Intersectionality." Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 30(3):1771– 1800.
Organisers
Magdalena Małecka
Elena Popa
Understanding Scientific Understanding - EENPS reading group [2020]
Dear members,
We are continuing our reading group on the subject of scientific explanation and understanding, started in 2020 with the discussion of de Regt's book 'Understanding Scientific Understanding'.
We will focus on more recent developments as reflected in up-to-date published papers and relevant work-in-progress manuscripts.
For information on the schedule and the readings or if you have some suggestions, please contact:
Richard David-Rus at [email protected] or [email protected]
or Lilia Gurova at [email protected] or [email protected].
We are continuing our reading group on the subject of scientific explanation and understanding, started in 2020 with the discussion of de Regt's book 'Understanding Scientific Understanding'.
We will focus on more recent developments as reflected in up-to-date published papers and relevant work-in-progress manuscripts.
For information on the schedule and the readings or if you have some suggestions, please contact:
Richard David-Rus at [email protected] or [email protected]
or Lilia Gurova at [email protected] or [email protected].
