1. Sharon Begley on “the science wars” The social constructionists : “It is not that evil scientists intentionally set out to enshrine the prejudices of the day in their research conclusions. But as mere mortals, they cannot escape their influences. Science…is therefore, a ‘social construct’” (115). The extreme: Absolute Relativism Vs. The realists : “ we are…measuring something real, something that is not a social construct …. ‘[T]he constraints of the data are what make the difference between writing a novel about the past and doing [insert any kind of science here]’” (118) The extreme: Absolute Truth

2. The middle ground: “a constructionist materialism” (Harding, 38) Standpoint theory Strong objectivity Situated knowledges Material feminisms

3. Your classmate on objectivity: “I think that [appreciating the intersectionality of every identity] could make science stronger, even by its own criteria (objectivity, generalizability). Being allowed to ignore vast swaths of experience, data, and identities doesn’t improve knowledge; it’s producing big blind spots, real weaknesses. I definitely don’t think it would hurt anything, but maybe it would produce more accurate theories and better, more inclusive studies.”

4. Sandra Harding: “A Socially Relevant Philosophy of Science? Resources from Standpoint Theory’s Controversiality”

5. the scientific method

6. Standpoint theory & science: we know not in spite of, but because of, social location Begin from experiences of marginalization “Study-Up” …or… view from “below” Transparency regarding certain, inherent biases Claims are made to be locatable; accountable\ Still partial