Ciencia con valores: hacia una “nueva” filosofía de la ciencia
[EN] Much of the philosophy of science developed during the 20th century considered that science should be free of non-cognitive or contextual values, because only in this way would the autonomy, impartiality and objectivity of good science be achieved. However, numerous investigations, especially t...
| Autor: | |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2025 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC) |
| Repositorio: | DIGITAL.CSIC. Repositorio Institucional del CSIC |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:digital.csic.es:10261/402185 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/10261/402185 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Scientific values Feminist epistemologies Feminist philosophy of science Objectivity Intersubjectivity Strong objectivity Valores en ciencia Epistemologías feministas Filosofía feminista de la ciencia Objetividad Intersubjetividad Objetividad fuerte Womens liberation movement Epistemology |
| Sumario: | [EN] Much of the philosophy of science developed during the 20th century considered that science should be free of non-cognitive or contextual values, because only in this way would the autonomy, impartiality and objectivity of good science be achieved. However, numerous investigations, especially those developed from feminist epistemologies and philosophy of science, have shown the relevance of these values, not only in cases of bad science, but also in authoritative science, without losing objectivity. In this paper I briefly show some cases that serve to present two notions of objectivity: ‘intersubjectivity’, proposed by Helen Longino, and ‘strong objectivity’, by Sandra Harding, which, although they emerged as antagonistic, have been moving closer together, but still differ in some respects. I conclude by presenting a set of values, different in part from those proposed by authors such as Thomas S. Kuhn, which would help to shape a more democratic, plural and inclusive science. |
|---|