Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gbm5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T19:53:25.501Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

What Lies Ahead: Envisioning New Futures for Feminist Philosophy

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 March 2020

Abstract

Thanks in large part to the record of scholarship fostered by Hypatia, feminist philosophers are now positioned not just as critics of the canon, but as innovators advancing uniquely feminist perspectives for theorizing about the world. As relatively junior feminist scholars, the five of us were called upon to provide some reflections on emerging trends in feminist philosophy and to comment on its future. Despite the fact that we come from diverse subfields and philosophical traditions, four common aims emerged in our collaboration as central to the future of feminist philosophies. We seek to: 1) challenge universalist and essentialist frameworks without ceding to relativism; 2) center coloniality and embodiment in our analyses of the intermeshed realities of race and gender by shifting from oppression in the abstract to concrete cosmologies and struggles, particularly those of women of color and women of colonized communities across the globe; 3) elaborate the materialities of thought, being, and community that must succeed atomistic conceptions of persons as disembodied, individually constituted, and autonomous; 4) demonstrate what is distinctive and valuable about feminist philosophy, while fighting persistent marginalization within the discipline. In our joint musings here, we attempt to articulate how future feminist philosophies might advance these aims, as well as some of the challenges we face.

Type
Musings
Copyright
Copyright © 2010 by Hypatia, Inc.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Dotson, Kristie. 2010. Testimonial smothering and epistemic resistance. In Feminist epistemology and philosophy of science: Power in knowledge, ed. Grasswick, Heidi. Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
Fricker, Miranda. 2007. Epistemic injustice: Power and the ethics of knowing. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grosz, Elizabeth. 1999. Merleau‐Ponty and Irigaray in the flesh. In Merleau‐Ponty, interiority and exteriority, psychic life and the world, ed. Olkowski, Dorothea and Morley, James. Albany: SUNY Press.Google Scholar
Harding, Sandra. 2008. Sciences from below: Feminisms, postcolonialities, and modernities. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haslanger, Sally. 2008. Changing the ideology and culture of philosophy: Not by reason (alone). Hypatia 23 (2): 210–23.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lloyd, Elizabeth. 1995. Objectivity and the double standard for feminist epistemologies. Synthese 104 (3): 351–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lloyd, Genevieve. 1984. The man of reason: “Male” and “female” in western philosophy. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Longino, Helen. 2002. The fate of knowledge. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lugones, María. 2007. Heterosexualism and the colonial/modern gender system. Hypatia 22 (1): 186209.Google Scholar
Mignolo, Walter. 2007. Delinking: The rhetoric of modernity, the logic of coloniality, and the grammar of decoloniality. Cultural Studies 21 (2): 449514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulman, Sarah. 2009. Ties that bind: Familial homophobia and its consequences. New York: The New Press.Google Scholar
Shohat, Ella, and Stam, Robert. 1994. Unthinking Eurocentrism: Multiculturalism and the media. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Tuana, Nancy, and Sullivan, Shannon, eds. 2006. Feminist epistemologies of ignorance. Special issue. Hypatia 21 (3).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, Elizabeth. 2004. Psychosomatic: Feminism and the neurological body. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar