Switch to: Citations

Add references

You must login to add references.
  1. Political philosophy of science in logical empiricism: the left Vienna Circle.Thomas Uebel - 2005 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 36 (4):754-773.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   33 citations  
  • The Left Vienna Circle, Part 1. Carnap, Neurath, and the Left Vienna Circle thesis.Sarah S. Richardson - 2009 - Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 40 (1):14-24.
    Recent scholarship resuscitates the history and philosophy of a ‘left wing’ in the Vienna Circle, offering a counterhistory to the conventional image of analytic philosophy as politically conformist. This paper disputes the historical claim that early logical empiricists developed a political philosophy of science. Though some individuals in the Vienna Circle, including Rudolf Carnap and Otto Neurath, believed strongly in the importance of science to social progress, they did not construct a political philosophy of science. Both Carnap and Neurath were (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   14 citations  
  • Logical Empiricism, Feminism, and Neurath's Auxiliary Motive.Kathleen Okruhlik - 2004 - Hypatia 19 (1):48-72.
    Much feminist philosophy of science has been developed as a reaction against logical empiricism and the associated view that social factors play no role in good science. Recent accounts of the Vienna Circle that highlighted the ways in which some of its members attempted to combine their empiricism with emancipatory politics are used here as a basis on which to reassess the relationship between logical empiricism and feminism. The focus is chiefly on Otto Neurath.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   15 citations  
  • Comments on science and social responsibility: A role for philosophy of science?Helen E. Longino - 1997 - Philosophy of Science 64 (4):179.
    Each of the three papers offers a different model for the role philosophers of science might play in consideration of the relations of science to society. These comments address common themes in the three papers, articulate further questions for each, and suggest some historical shifts that require different forms of philosophical engagement now than in the early part of the century.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   8 citations  
  • A philosophy of science for the twenty‐first century.Janet A. Kourany - 2003 - Philosophy of Science 70 (1):1-14.
    Two major reasons feminists are concerned with science relate to science's social effects: that science can be a powerful ally in the struggle for equality for women; and that all too frequently science has been a generator and perpetuator of inequality. This concern with the social effects of science leads feminists to a different mode of appraising science from the purely epistemic one prized by most contemporary philosophers of science. The upshot, I suggest, is a new program for philosophy of (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   50 citations  
  • Changing the Ideology and Culture of Philosophy: Not by Reason (Alone).Sally Haslanger - 2008 - Hypatia 23 (2):210-223.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   145 citations  
  • The Practice of Conceptual History Timing History, Spacing Concepts.Reinhart Koselleck & Todd Samuel Presner - 2002
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   40 citations  
  • Philosophical Feminism: A Bibliographic Guide to Critiques of Science.Alison Wylie - 1990 - Resources for Feminist Research 19 (2):2-36.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   5 citations  
  • Viewing Science.Ronald N. Giere - 1994 - PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1994:3 - 16.
    This address focuses on those of us engaged in viewing science, particularly philosophers and sociologists of science. I begin with a historical perspective on the philosophy of science, focusing on the historical contingencies which have shaped its development since the 1930s. I then turn my gaze to the more recent history of the sociology of science. For both disciplines I hold up to view the reflexive problem of the status of that discipline's claims from its own perspective. I conclude with (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   6 citations