An overview of the essays in the second issue of the special edition of Hypatia: A Journal of Feminist Philosophy devoted to feminism and science.

In this paper I outline a role for mechanistic conceptions of organisms in ancient Greek natural philosophy, especially the study of organisms. By ‘mechanistic conceptions’ I mean the use of ideas and techniques drawn from the field of mechanics to investigate the natural world. ‘Mechanistic conceptions’ of organisms in ancient Greek philosophy, then, are those that draw on the ancient understanding of the field called ‘mechanics’ — hê mêchanikê technê—to investigate living things, rather than those bearing some perceived similarity to (...) modern notions of ‘the mechanical.’ I have argued elsewhere that evidence of mechanistic conceptions of the natural world can be found, not only among seventeenth and eighteenth century ‘mechanical philosophers,’ but also—albeit in vestigial form — in some ancient Greek texts. Unfortunately, these reports are slight, often by detractors of this approach, and offer only clues as to the motivational context for employing these mechanical conceptions. Here, my purpose is to suggest what role they might have played in the history of natural philosophy. (shrink)

In contrast to Aristotle's male oriented explanation of procreation the Galenic was 'feminist' inasmuch as both sexes were presented as contributing equally in conception and accordingly both had to experience pleasure... Anatomically, the two sexes were presented in Galenic accounts as complementary, the difference being that the man's genitalia were on the outside and the woman's on the inside. The clitoris was likened to the penis and the ovaries considered 'testicles' or 'stones' that produced seed. The male seed was, it (...) is true, depicted by Galenists as superior in having 'spiritual' qualities lacking in the female, but Galen's reproductive schema was far more egalitarian than Aristotle's. (shrink)

Historians of medicine and generation have long demonstrated how the female body was conceptualized as a site of secrecy in early modern Europe. This essay explores one oft-overlooked organ of the female body—the placenta, which was considered by early modern anatomists to be a particularly challenging secret to uncover. Anatomists who investigated this organ discovered that it was largely absent from the ancients’ accounts of their knowledge of generation, and their own studies of its structure and function revealed a complexity (...) difficult to understand. Through an analysis of anatomical treatises and midwifery guides, this essay investigates how textual and visual knowledge about the placenta was produced and shared by anatomists, medical practitioners, and female midwives. It argues that the secrets of the placenta presented a lucrative opportunity for anatomists to expand their intellectual and financial riches. The study provides fresh insights for historians of science, medicine, and gender and new perspectives on the history of reproduction and embryology. (shrink)

This article is devoted to the biological phenomenon of female sexual pleasure and aims at determining its causal role in Aristotle’s biological doctrine. In considering several passages of the De Generatione Animalium, the author suggests that female sexual pleasure is one of the phenomena that Aristotle defines as “for what is better”. The study of this phenomenon provides the opportunity to rethink the place of the final cause in Aristotle’s causal system and the nature of the so-called “derivative” teleology. In (...) the second part of the study, the author provides an overview of the Greco-Arabic reception of Aristotle’s doctrine. The study of the debate prompted by Averroes against Galen in the xiith century AD shows the importance of the issue of female sexual pleasure in the Greco-Arabic peripatetism and clarifies in turn the doctrine of the Stagyrite. (shrink)

Aristotle’s theory of seed has occupied a very important place in the history of ancient embryology and medicine. Previous studies have overemphasized, in light of the APo. II method, Aristotle’s definition of seed as male semen. In this paper, I wish to show that there are at least three independent definitions of seed working in Aristotle’s Generation of Animals: seed as male semen, seed as female menstruation and seed as embryo. Those three definitions are mutually exclusive on the one hand, (...) but on the other hand, they are also capable of being unified into one Aristotelian account, which can help us understand better Aristotle’s theory of seed. (shrink)