Metaphorical thinking, strong objectivity, and standpoint theory - Lecture 3 PDF

Preview

Summary

Reading by Harding, strong objectivity

Professor Hill...

Description

Metaphorical thinking, strong objectivity, and standpoint theory Thesis: a claim that is both specific and contestable. You need evidence, via subordinate claims.

HARDING: STRONG OBJECTIVITY Thesis: value-neutral objectivism and judgmental relativism are flawed, and a balanced take on objectivity, in which the relation between the subject and object is acknowledged, is the best method of research. Science, both natural and social, has been shaped by personal bias under the guise of being objective. Science would be more accurate and rigorous if the method of research included strong objectivity, in which the relationship between the subject and object is consciously acknowledged. Structure of article: Here's the two sides of the false dichotomy; here's the third option, called strong objectivity. Combining feminist and scientific thinking to bring those camps together. EPISTEMOLOGY: a branch of philosophy that investigates the origin, nature, methods, and limits of human knowledge

Harding argues against: (weak) Objectivism: faith in scientific conclusions; relying solely on experimental conditions (rather than personal history of why that became an experiment at all etc.) False dichotomy: two opposing views, neither appropriate choices Cultural relativism: there is no absolute right or wrong, there are just different perspectives based on different cultures (weak) objectivity: there is only one right thing and some cultures/perspectives are right or wrong. RELATIVISM/ RELATIVITY, OBJECTIVISM/OBJECTIVITY, STRONG OBJECTIVITY Harding explains in "Strong Objectivity" and Socially Situated Knowledge that traditional "hard" science tends to favor and uphold objectivism. Value-free objectivity is the idea that there is one right perspective or answer, uninfluenced by different societal or cultural views. Science uses value-free objectivity to focus in on its data and conclusions as objectively true, isolating that data from all the decisions and biases that went into a direction of research, carrying out experiments by individuals, funding by institutions, etc. The data cannot be impartial, yet science claims it is. Judgmental relativism, Harding explains, has been valued by feminists. There are different perspectives favored in different cultures, and each culture is valid, therefore all perspectives are right. Recuperative history incorporates the narratives of marginalized people like women and minorities, and their perspectives must be equally valid as white men's. However, Harding argues that Feminist Science Studies argues for strong objectivity. She says, "a feminist standpoint epistemology requires strengthened standards of objectivity," and "they call for the acknowledgement that all human beliefs - including our best scientific beliefs -- are socially situated, but they also require a critical evaluation to determine which social situations tend to

generate the most objective knowledge claims" (142). In this approach, there must be a "right" conclusion, which is objective, but in order to find that objective conclusion and know that it is objective, the relationship between the subject and object of science must be examined. Scientists must be aware of their social positions and their relationship with the object of study, and how that can influence their conclusions. Strong objectivity will make science more rigorous and accurate....