Sandra Harding 's Science And Social Inequality

Moreover, they used race, sex, and gender to impact the sociopolitical sphere, and create a certain level of autonomy and monopolization over scientific knowledge (Gieryn, 1983: 783). This directly relates to our discussion on credibility, and the popular image of the scientist as one of constructing facts (Haraway 1991: 23). Creating and maintaining an image of someone who is objective, one uninfluenced by social aspects (ibid: 23). Thus, making scientists absolved from any social accountability, and free from any restraints outside of the scientific community (ibid

Within the article titled “The Mistrust of Science” by Atul Gawande, the article is a written document of an address at the California Institute of Technology and describes the connection of science to every single human on Earth. This is done because the presenter defines science as “a systematic way of thinking” since science allows humans to contemplate beyond the information being given to them at any time, such as the questions may follow of how, when, where, why, and how? The presenter states the opinion that, no matter what major you are declared as or the type of occupation you hold, science is embedded into the way you are living, despite you not having any knowledge of certain science topics.

As per research ‘gender’ provides a perspective from which one could examine the biases that exist in the larger society. Some believe that to arrive at a more eloquent understanding of the problems of women in science , one should begin by asking what is the nature of science space that leads to under-representation and marginalisation of women rather than questioning the situation of a woman’s life that makes it difficult for her to pursue science.

Throughout Gender and Race in the Physical Sciences, I have been struck by how rarely in STEM we shed a light on the women of color that already exist and thrive in the sciences. Often, when we discuss diversity in the sciences, we only discuss it in the frame of a problem. More specifically, we tend to focus on the problem of there not being enough of these women in the field. As a result of the lack of attention paid to pioneering women in STEM, many young people of all backgrounds are inclined to believe that there are no women of color doing great things in the field- that there are no role models. With this paper, and an on-campus event to be held in the spring, I hope to challenge people’s assumptions about what a scientist looks like, and inspire people through a discussion of innovative women of color.

As groups continue to use science against one another, stereotypes are taking over the world and creating negativity within society. As women are being told they are not smart, African Americans are being told they are unequal, and Muslims are being told they are all terroristic by nature based on the science that claims their inferiority and stereotypes; peace cannot prevail and war cannot contain. Scientific research and social correlations are not viewable through the same ideas, or else stereotypes continue to rampage on claiming proof through science; and ultimately groups will continue to prove their stereotypes wrong through violent and hysteric means. Inaccurate scientific research is encouraging the social beliefs of the inferiority of certain groups, and creating an unjust and socially biased

Women were blocked from nearly any form of scientific experiment or inquiry. Margaret Cavendish, an English natural philosopher and the first woman to visit a meeting of the Royal Society, illustrates the “disregard of the female sex” in sciences (Doc. 9). Unsurprisingly, men continued to oppress women and block any and all paths to gaining social standing. Science, like almost all other domains, continued to be controlled by

Amid the mid 1900s, women were a rarity in the field of science. Female participation in the field was not encouraged. Women were often discouraged from advancing their education and indulging in advanced academics solely due to gender. The relentless acts of courageous women continued to challenge the lack of diversity within the science world. Rachel Carson was a pioneer in changing the face of science. Carson broke barriers with her ecological education, forcing the acknowledgment of female researchers today.

Social inequality can practically be made apparent at any moment of someone’s life – whether at work or school amongst peers or simply watching the news in the morning. According to Dalton Conley, social inequality is narrowly defined as “a condition in which a difference in wealth, power, prestige, or status based on nonnatural conventions exist” (2017 p.241). Moreover, social inequality is a process whereby society can determine how a class of people is expected to coexist within predetermined social, political, and economic boundaries. The affected class will live within the predefined constraints, and the affected class will then pass the predefined constraints on to future generations. It is imperative to understand that social inequality is a result of social stratification, which according to

As the only sociologist that has been chosen on the North American council I would like to address my main concern, which is that having one person voice the social inequalities for approximately 580 million people is not just. In my best attempt to be as fair and voice the major concerns that I feel are prevalent throughout North America, I chose racial inequality, educational inequality, and gender inequality. Before I further discuss these inequalities I would like to define social inequality to give the reader a clearer understanding, “Social inequality is the long term existence of significant differences in access to goods and services among social groups”, as quoted from our textbook.

Gina McCarthy — who works for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) — builds an argument on the importance of science at the EPA in an article entitled "Why Science Matters".

It was developed by Mills in a time of great social upheaval – industrialisation, globalisation and capitalism meant that the social phenomena were different to those previously experienced. The meta-narrative of science and ‘scientism’, previously used to develop theories of society, began to be presenting more moral questions and

In briefly evaluating the classical and modern explanations of social inequality, it is essential that we step outside the realm of our own lives, class position, and discard any assumptions we might have about the nature of inequality. This process of critical pedagogy allows us to view our world, not from our perspective, but from a wider, more critical analysis of inequality's nature. Also, it should be considered within this wider perspective that all theories of inequality have a class perspective, where the theorist, based on the position their theory takes, is making claims from (or for) a particular class (whether they want to or not). With this in mind, it seems that most of these theories come

Other phrases throughout the first four pages use words like "nightmare", "destroy", "haunt", and "anguish" to attract readers to how seriously society takes awareness of science. These phrases get readers to feel the urgency of the views against science in society. The dark phrasing successfully shows that society has taken a responsible view against incorrect scientific application.

As people, we come with earlier knowledge and understandings on subjects and topics of study, “Science” being one of them. We make presumptions, based on either reasonable evidence or that our thoughts and ideas are known as true by others. Through this we have come to understand and define science as its aims, leaving its definition, whether consciously or unconsciously, unchallenged. We have taken advantage of the label that we have set for science, as well as its goals, and failed to look at them further.

Feminist interaction with the philosophy of science, and in particular a feminist interpretation of epistemology, concerns the extent to which bias influences and shapes knowledge within the scientific community, and means to rectify this. There are three main distinctions of feminist philosophy of science - feminist empiricism, standpoint theory, and postmodernism. I am to be comparing and contrasting two of the three, specifically feminist standpoint theory and empiricism. I shall argue that standpoint theory and empiricism are both legitimate methods for feminist epistemology, yet standpoint theory is a more applicable and plausible method for the analysis of science in particular. I will first explain the main tenets of the feminist philosophy of science, going on to then explain reasons why standpoint theory and postmodernism are legitimate tools of analysis in their own right, and then evaluate their legitimacy.