UNIT : SCIENTIFIC METHOD AND ITS CRITIQUE

Renu Addlakha
Centre for Womens Development Studies
New Delhi

_________________________________________________
STRUCTURE
1

Introduction

Objectives

3.1

What is the Classical scientific Method?

3.1.

Brief History of the Classical Scientific Method

3.2.

Basic Steps in the Classical Scientific Method

4.

Classical Scientific Method and Social Science Research

5. CRITIQUE OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD

5.1. Feminist Critique of the Scientific Method
6. Let us Sum Up
7.

Glossary

8. Unit End Questions

9. References
10. Suggested Readings
11. Additional Readings
___________________________________________________________
1. INTRODUCTION
How is the world understood? How is reality gauged? How is knowledge gained? Over the
past three hundred years since the Enlightenment, the scientific method has emerged as the

predominant, universally accepted approach to acquiring knowledge. As against religious

faith, magic and superstition, the scientific method is a way of arriving at an empirical,
impartial and reliable representation of the world. The basic assumptions of the scientific
method are that reality is objective and consistent, that human beings have the capacity to
perceive reality accurately and that rational explanations exist for understanding this reality.
Essentially, it involves the application of a set of
standardised procedures for asking
questions, gathering information or data to answer the questions and testing the validity,
reliability and consistency of the results. Different modes of logical reasoning, existing
theories and laws, classification and statistical procedures are used in combination to
operationalise the scientific method with the aim of arriving at truth. It is the purpose of this
Unit to provide a detailed description of this method, including a critique, to enable you to
drawn upon it for your research.

2 OBJECTIVES

Scientific method refers to a

body
of
techniques
for
investigating
phenomena,
acquiring new knowledge or
correcting and integrating
previous
knowledge
(Goldhaber and Nieto 2010:
940). The Italian scientist
Galileo Galilei (1564-1642) is
considered the founder of the
scientific method.

At the end of this unit:

You should have a clear understanding of the classical scientific method;
You should be able to understand in applying the classical scientific method in the
social sciences;
You should be familiar with the feminist critique of the scientific method;
You should be able to use the basic steps of the scientific method in
conceptualising a research problem in social science research in general, and in
women and gender studies in particular..
____________________________________________________________________

3 WHAT IS THE CLASSICAL SCIENTIFIC METHOD?

The classical scientific method broadly refers to a set of procedures and
techniques for acquiring knowledge. Historically, the foundations of this
method were laid during the Enlightenment when European thought
moved from a magico-religious understanding of reality to one dominated
by reason and science. It involves positing logical connections between
phenomena, gathering empirical and measurable evidence confirming or
refuting the proposed connections. The Oxford English Dictionary defines
the scientific method as as a method or procedure that has characterised

natural science since the 17th century, consisting in systematic

observation, measurement and experiment, and the formulation, testing
and modification of hypotheses.
Generality, scientific method should give results that are not only capable
of verification by others, but also that have universal applicability under
similar conditions. Science is not concerned with individual cases or
instances but with classes and groups of objects and events of which the
individual is only a specimen.
3.1 Brief History of the Classical Scientific Method
The scientific method is not a purely modern invention because ancient
Egyptians document describe application of empirical methods in
astronomy, mathematics and medicine. The Greek philosopher Thales
(624 BC546 BC) rejected religious, magical and supernatural
explanations, proclaiming that every event has a natural cause. The Greek
philosopher Aristotle (384-322 BC) is regarded as the inventor of the
scientific method because of his detailed study of logic. Experimental
methods were developed by Islamic scholars like Alhazen (965 -1040 AD)
who worked on optics and physiology.
The development of the scientific method as the principal mode of
acquiring knowledge emerged during the Renaissance through the works
of numerous pioneering scientists and philosophers such as Nicolaus
Copernicus (1473-1543) who showed that it was not the ear but the sun
which was the centre of the solar system; William Harvey (1578-1657) who
described in accurate detail the functioning of the human circulatory
system, Robert Boyle (1627-1691) regarded by many as the Father of
Modern Chemistry and many others who performed controlled
experiments providing elaborate details concerning procedure, apparatus
and observations. Perhaps, the most well known of these great scientists is
without doubt Isaac Newton (1942-1727). Francis Baconss Novum
Organum (1620) and Rene Descartes Discourse on method (1637)
provided the theoretical foundation of the classical scientific method.
In contrast to faith, dogma and tradition embodied in religious belief and
superstition, these thinkers advocated what would today be called the
scientific temper. The basic features of the scientific temper are a belief
in an underlying order in nature that is knowable through reason, the idea
that every natural phenomenon has a cause which can be known and the
universal accessibility to understanding nature through a set of
methodological procedures based on observation, measurement,
classification, experimentation, verification and prediction. Truth is not
based on blind faith in the word of God found in the scriptures but
available to anyone following the method(s) of science. For example, the
geocentric model of the solar system was replaced by the heliocentric

model proposed by Copernicus which was based on observation of

planetary motions through telescopes, while the earlier theory was based
on religious faith not backed by actual observation. Science is
conceptualized as an objective enterprise and the scientific approach aims
to minimize the influence of bias of the individual scientist on the results
of the research.
Check your progress
1. Discuss in brief the main features of the scientific method and its
approach to knowledge.

3.2: BASIC STEPS IN THE CLASSICAL SCIENTIFIC METHOD

As already mentioned, the scientific method consists of systematic
observation, definition, classification, measurement, analysis and
interpretation. These activities are performed in a standardised sequential
manner from the conceptualisation of a research question, developing a
research design for answering them, interpretation of the results and
prediction and verification of the same.
The critical characteristic of the scientific method lies in the procedure or
steps involved in proposing hypotheses to explain phenomena, and
designing experimental studies to test them in such a fashion that we may
arrive at universally accepted facts. The procedure should enable other
researchers to arrive at the same results when doing the experiment
under similar conditions. The aim of this section is to familiarise you with
the various steps involved in the classical the scientific method.
The main steps or stages of the application of the scientific method are:
1. Observation and description of phenomenon;
2. Formulation of a hypothesis to explain the phenomenon. In the classical
scientific method of which physics is the paradigmatic example it takes
the form of a causal mechanism or mathematical relation;
3. Using the hypothesis to predict existence of other phenomenon or the
results of new observations;
4. Performance of experiments to test the hypothesis by several
impendent researchers. If all the researchers come to the same results,
then the hypothesis will become a theory or law Experimental
verification is the key for the success of the scientific method.
HYPOTHESIS: It is a general statement about a relationship between
phenomena that is open to being tested or becoming the subject of a systematic

investigation. It may be derived logically from existing data or may be a stray

hunch, guess or observation. Analogies or similarities are an important source of
hypotheses. The hypothesis should be specific, conceptually clear, related to
available theories and techniques so that it can be tested.
Scientific knowledge is cumulative or incremental in the sense that existing
theories are fertile sources of new hypotheses, which are subjected to
experimental verification leading to the development of new theories and laws.
Science evolves gradually building upon existing knowledge. Scientific theories
vary in the extent to which they have been experimentally tested and for how
long and in their acceptance in the scientific community. All scientific theory is
closely tied to empirical findings, and hence always remains subject to
falsification in the event of a contradictory finding. In that sense scientific
knowledge is always provisional. Two contemporary examples will illustrate the
provisional nature of scientific knowledge. Current work in quantum and particle
physics contests Einsteins general theory of relativity according to which
nothing travels faster than light. According to current thinking in quantum
theory, there are possibly subatomic particles that move faster than light. This is
a hypothesis subject to experimentation. On the other hand, there is a general
belief that the Earth is not the only habitable planet in the universe. The recent
discovery of a number of earth-like planets orbiting distant stars that could
sustain life forms is a hypothesis but there are no methods at present available
to test it.

A critical element of the scientific method is reducing the influence of bias or prejudice of the
researcher. Objectivity is an ideal pre-requisite of the scientific method. Objectivity is the
characteristic of something that is not influenced by either changing contextual conditions or
the observer. E.g. god is yellow because it appears the same to all human eyes, but if we say
it is a precious metal, then, that is not an objective, characteristic of the metal. The ideal
model of the researcher is an emotionally detached observer whose values and beliefs do not
interfere with the experiment. This stance is called value neutrality, which assumes that
social, political and moral values should/ play no role in the search for truth.
One of the ways of guaranteeing objectivity is reliance on quantitative data or
numbers. Hence the great importance attached to counting and measurement of
variables in the scientific method. Operational definitions of relevant variables,
preferably in quantitative terms, are de rigueur in science, such as measurement
of temperature in degrees centigrade, power in volts or electrical current in
amperes. The fact that quantitative data can be subjected to statistical
manipulation and represented in tables and graphs confers upon it a greater
level of objectivity than representation of information in the form of qualitative
data or language.
An experiment can take several forms; for example, a classical laboratory
experiment under controlled conditions or an archaeological excavation. Often, in
the classical experimental design, the experimental and control group strategy
are adopted, wherein both the groups are similar is every way possible except

that the former is exposed to the phenomenon under study while the latter is
not. The difference in the results is then attributed to the variable under study.
Since prediction of results and replication of the experiment under similar
conditions by other researchers are critical in the verification process, detailed
record keeping and archiving of the whole process are crucial components of the
scientific method. Other scientists must be able to repeat the experiment and
duplicate the results or arrive at the same results following the same approach.
International journals like Science and Nature mandate a policy of data and
methods archiving as part of the peer review process, so that others can repeat
the process for verification.
It will be noticed that the scientific method is a more systematic and refined
version of ordinary logical thinking wherein experience presents us with a
problem. We try to solve the problem by guessing a possible reason or cause
which becomes a prediction. Then, we test our conjecture to see if our guess is
correct or not. If we are right, then we have an explanation. If we are wrong, then
we make another guess and go through the process again. This is referred to as
the iterative cycle. Forms of reasoning in scientific research like deductive and
inductive inference are more refined versions of everyday logical thinking that
we all engage in.
Check your progress
Enumerate the basic steps in the scientific method.
___________________________________________________
4. Classical Scientific Method and Social Science Research
The main features of the classical scientific method, such as experimentation,
vreification, prediction, replicability and universality, have already been
discussed in the previous section. The exemplary location for testing of this
method is the laboratory setting, where conditions can be controlled for
experimentation and results can be derived in the form of causal connections.
The disciplines of physics, chemistry and biology have developed through this
approach which is why they are called experimental sciences.
But what happens when we want to study human behaviour and society? Can
the classical scientific method be equally successfully applied to finding causal
connections when the focus of enquiry shifts from the experimental to the social
and human sciences? This section discusses the main problems to the
application of the classical method to the study of social phenomena.
Social scientists tried to apply the techniques of the natural sciences for the
study of human psyche and society. But it was soon found that social reality is
very different, and it is not possible to apply the classical scientific method
without modification for its study due to the following reasons:

1. COMPLEXITY OF SOCIAL DATA No two persons are exactly alike and even
the behaviour of the same individual varies under different circumstances.
So, it is difficult to generalise about social phenomena in the form of
universal cause-effect relationships. For example, most people will run
away from a burning building, but some may stay behind risking their own
lives to save others.
2. SOCIAL PHENOMEONA IS UNPREDICTIBLE: Due to the complexity of social
phenomena, it is difficult to predict human behaviour and arrive at laws
that are universally true under identical circumstances. This is in contrast
to the high level of predictability that prevails in the case of physical and
chemical phenomena.
3. PLURALITY OF CAUSES AND INTERMIXTURE OF EFFECTS: Not only do social
phenomena have a range of causes, but it is also difficult to clearly
distinguish between cause and effect in the case of social data. For
instance, higher rates of crime in a city may be due to unemployment,
inflation and/or lax policing. Then, poverty may lead to higher rates of
disability in society because more people become disabled due to lack of
access to adequate nutrition and healthcare; but disability may also lead
to poverty in that more disabled persons will find it difficult to find and
maintain a job because they are disabled, leading to a higher incidence of
poverty among disabled persons.
4. SOCIAL PHENOMENA ARE HETEROGENEOUS: Since there are multiple
causes and it is difficult o demarcate between causes and effects, the
relative homogeneity detected in natural phenomena gives way to a high
level of diversity and heterogeneity in the case of social phenomena.
5. DIFFICULTY IN MEASURMENT AND QUANTIFICATION: Due to such diversity,
it is difficult to quantify and consequently measure social categories. This
is unlike the case of mass, weight, gravity, current and other physical and
chemical phenomena.. For instance, urbanisation, indiscipline, assimilation
and other social concepts are difficult to translate in quantitative terms.
6. SUBJECTIVITY OF THE RESEARCHER AND OBJECTIVITY OF THE RESEARCH:
Since the subject and object of study, namely human beings, are the
same, the experimental method becomes particularly difficult to apply.
Then, laboratory experimentation is difficult in the case of human
behaviour and social phenomena because it would introduce an artificiality
in the research as subjects would be aware that they are being studied
challenging the possibility of complete objectivity. Furthermore, the issue
of bias of the researcher and objectivity of findings arises in the case of
social data.
The above notwithstanding, the basic paradigm of the classical scientific method
does form the backbone of most social science research even today, including
research in interdisciplinary areas like women and gender studies. Indeed, one
cannot deny the fact that under similar circumstances, most persons behave in

similar, if not identifiably, ways. Concepts of objectivity, cause effect

relationships and verification have been complemented with concepts of
intersubjectivity and interpretation, to make the classical scientific method more
amenable to the study of human behaviour and society. Laboratory-based
experimentation has been replaced with other data collection methods like
interviews, questionnaires and field observations.
Social research essentially involves using experience to arrive at a conjecture,
testing the conjecture, arriving at a result, making some prediction from the
result and then testing it out again The main steps for conducting the research
involve:
1. Defining the problem and formulating a set of key research questions;
2. Gathering information to answer the questions;
3. Arriving at some explanation for the problem after collecting and
analysing the relevant data;
4. Interpreting the data.
5. Disseminating the results to other members of the social science
community.
___________________________________________________________check your
progress
1. Discus the difficulties in applying the scientific method to the study of
social phenomena.
________________________________________________________________

5 CRITIQUE OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD

The paradigm of acquiring knowledge embedded in the scientific method that
came into prominence from the Enlightenment dominated for over 300 years
when it came under scrutiny. Historians and philosophers of science highlighted
the disjunction between the canons of the scientific method and their actual
practice in concrete contexts highlighting in particular the subjectivity of the
individual scientist and the strong role of existing theories in deciding the nature
and type of observations made in impacting the research process. Sociological
and historical studies of science like the works Michael Polanyi (1891-1976),
Ludvik Fleck (1896-1961), Karl Popper (1904-1994), Imre Lakatos (1922-1974)
and Thomas Kuhn (1922-1996) and Paul Feyerabend (1924-1994) have
highlighted the socio-cultural roots of the scientific method. Through detailed
analysis of the actual practice of science in concrete settings, they have shown
how the ideals of pure science such as universality, objectivity and value-

neutrality are more ideological concepts than actual facts when operationalised
in the actual process of research.

The heuristic model of the scientific method and its practical application i.e. the gap between
the theory and practice of science is the source of such criticism. Social science studies of
science contend that sscience is a social process since the experimental results must be
reproducible by others in the scientific community. For instance, Thomas Kuhn (1962) felt
that scientists work with preconceived notions and theories which subtly impact their
observations and measurements. Once a theory is accepted by the scientific community, it not
only becomes untestable but it forms the basis of other theories constituting a veritable norm.
According to Ludwik Fleck (1979), scientists must examine their own biases and experiences
to understand how it impacts their research.
There are many possible critiques of the scientific method, from many different viewpoints
and for many different reasons. One of the most powerful criticisms is that in the garb of
objectivity, a great deal of bias and prejudice is cloaked. For instance, racism underlies the
science of eugenics just as sexism colours reproductive biology. In fact, the inhuman
medicinal research carried out during the Nazi regime in Germany was embedded in a radical
notion of science completely bypassing the whole issue of human morality. It is due to this
massive abuse of science that research ethics emerged as a critical moderator of the scientific
method to protect human subjects against harm arising out research, particularly medical
research.
For purposes of this unit, we will confine ourselves to a detailed account of the
feminist critique of science and the scientific method in the concluding section.
____________________________________________________

5.1. FEMINIST CRITIQUE OF THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD

_______________________________________________________
How science and technology disadvantage women and other vulnerable groups by
subordinating their interests. For instance, the ways economic development policies reinforce
gender hierarchy by focussing on men. Another level of criticism is the actual absence of
women in science ad technology, which is embedded in the education system that
systematically discourages women from pursuing studies in certain disciplines e.g. physics
and mathematics, while encouraging them in others e.g. social sciences, humanities and
languages.
The social location of the researcher and situated knowledge are key concepts in the feminist
critique of science and in feminist methodology. The underlying concepts of feminist
research are summarised below:
1. The social location of the researcher defines the object of study: Social location
refers to a persons gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, caste, kinship,
occupation, religion etc. In that sense the whole debate on value neutrality and
detachment between observer and the phenomenon under study becomes redundant
from a feminist perspective. Feminist theoreticians contend that the way knowledge is
generated is deeply gendered, implying that the scientific method is itself flawed
because it reflects a male perspective on the world.

2. Reflexivity: It is the process of the researcher making explicit her social location,
interests, background assumptions, biases and other features of themselves showing
how they shape the questions, methods and interpretations of the research. Reflexivity
directly challenges the notion of value neutrality because it beings with the idea that
there is no possibility of doing any research without factoring in the perspective(s) of
those undertaking the research.
3. Situated Knowledge and Objectivity: The fact that knowledge is deeply contextdependant where it is produced and connected to the location of the researcher does
not mean that it is not objective. Indeed, Evelyn Fox Kellers (1985) notion of
dynamic objectivity and Sandra Hardings (1991) notion of strong objectivity show
that objectivity is not a universal taken-for-granted concept either. In contrast to the
obsessive compulsion to maintain distance and detachment from the object of study
found in traditional notions of objectivity, dynamic objectivity does not have the
neurotic anxiety to the maintain independence of the subject from the object of study.
In recognition of the intertwined relationship between power and knowledge, strong
objectivity underscores the standpoint of marginalised groups in the generation of
objective knowledge. According to Sandra Harding, knowledge produced by
subordinate groups has an edge because it unpacks many of the unquestioned
categories that the knowledge by powerful groups naturalises. Subaltern perspectives
are a form of situated knowledge that not only give voice to marginalised knowledges
but may also challenge the underpinnings of their own subordination. Strong
objectivity incorporates democratic inclusion with reflexivity.
4. Emotional Engagement: Abstract, theoretical, emotionally detached, analytic and
quantitative thinking that are intrinsic to the scientific method are regarded as typically
masculine cognitive styles. On the other hand, intuitive, holistic, contextual,
practical, emotionally involved, relational and qualitative modes of thinking are
labelled feminine. (Rooney 1991). Kellers notion of dynamic objectivity calls for a
fruitful emotional engagement with the object of study. That is why qualitative
methods like ethnography that seek identification with the objects/subjects of study
have been given preference by feminist scholars. However, this does not mean that
quantitative research cannot be done from a feminist perspective.
5. Examples of Gender Blind Perspectives in Science: The sexism or sexist bias in
science has come in for particular scrutiny in biology. Narrative of sperm and egg casts
the former as the active agent while the latter is passive obscuring the causal role of
the latter in fertilisation (Martin 1991). Similarly depicting the transition from ape to
hominid as a heroic drama puts the focus on presumptively male activities like hunting
as the driver of evolution obscuring the role of other equally but more presumptively
female or gender neutral activities and behaviours like food gathering, child care and
language as the engine of evolution (Haraway 1989).
In conclusion, one may say that the scientific method has been critiqued by feminist scholars
for its androcenetricsm, overgeneralisation, gender insensitivity and sexual double standards.
Feminist research approaches and methods emphasise on experience, pluralism, pragmatism
and the epistemic advantage of disadvantaged groups. They highlight the interplay of facts
and values, the centrality of situated knowledge and the need to move beyond ideas of
regulation and control that are intrinsically masculine in nature.

Check your Progress

1. How has the scientific method been critiqued?
2. Give an account of the feminist critique of the scientific method.
___________________________________________________________________
7. LET US SUM UP
This unit has described the main features of the classical scientific method as it evolved in the
experimental sciences over the past 300 years. This method has contributed to the
development of the many scientific discoveries and technological innovations that are the
architecture of modern life. However, science is not without its critics. The scientific method
has come in for criticism from many directions within the social sciences since the 1930s.
Philosophers, historians and sociologists of science like Thomas Kuhn, Karl Popper, Michael
Polanyi among a host of others have shown how the social context in which science is
practised influences its methodology, theory and results. Taking this critique to another level
feminist scholars like Evelyn Fox Keller, Sandra Harding, donna Haraway and Helen
Longino have shown that science is gender insensitive and biased both in theory and practice.
Feminist science exposes the sexist and androcentric biases in scientific research, especially
in theories about women, sexuality and gender differences. This is done by highlighting the
influence of social and political factors in what is described as a neutral in the search for
knowledge and truth. These different sections of this unit have focussed on these themes in
some detail.

________________________________________________
8. GLOSSARY
Androcentrism (from andro in Greek meaning male) is the practice, conscious
or otherwise, of placing male human beings or the masculine point of view at the
center of one's view of the world and its culture and history. The related adjective
is androcentric,

Empirical: Adjective referring to information gained by means of observation or

experimentation. A central concept in the scientific method is that all evidence must be
empirical, or empirically based, that is, dependent on evidence or consequences that are
observable by the senses. It is usually differentiated from the philosophic usage of empiricism
by the use of the adjective empirical or the adverb empirically. The term refers to the use of
hypotheses that are testable using observation or experiment. In this sense of the word,
scientific statements are subject to, and derived from, our experiences or observations
Enlightenment: An intellectual movement that began in Europe during the 18 th
century heralding the supremacy of reason and science over dogma religion and
tradition. The leading thinkers of this movement were Rene Descartes, Baruch

Spinoza, Gottfried Leibniz, Francis Bacon, Thomas Hobbes, and John Locke, The
roots of the scientific method lie in their works.
Eugenics: An applied medical science or the biosocial movement which
advocates the use of practices aimed at improving the genetic composition of a
population ", usually referring to human populations. Particularly popular in the
early decades of the 20 th century, it has posed serious ethical and political
challenges particularly its role in the Naxi programme of racial cleansing during
the Second World War.
Hypothesis: A limited statement about the relationship between phenomena in
terms of cause and effect. This is a common form of reasoning in everyday life
which we all adopt; for instance, if the gas in your kitchen does not work after
you have lit it, you may at the first instance hypothesise that the cylinder is not
turned on; if the cylinder is on, you may find out if the cylinder is empty or not.
That is another hypothesis. If you find it its empty, you order a new cylinder, but
if you discover that it still has gas, you may formulate another hypothesis, or you
may call the gas repairman to resolve the problem.
Renaissance: A cultural movement that spanned roughly the 14th to the 17th
century, beginning in Italy and then spreading to the rest of Europe. It
encompassed a flowering of literature, science, art, religion, and politics, and a
resurgence of learning based on classical sources, the development of linear
perspectives in painting, and gradual but widespread educational reform. This
intellectual transformation has resulted in the Renaissance being viewed as a
bridge between the middle Ages and the Modern era.

9. Unit End Questions

1. Discuss the role of the researcher in the study of physical and social sciences with a
particular focus on issues of subjectivity, bias and prejudice.
2. Critically evaluate the feminist critique of science.
3. Critically evaluate and comment on the following statement: Feminist methodology
corrupts the search for truth by its ideological position of equating science with
patriarchy.
_______________________________________________
10 CITED REFERENCES
Bacon, F, 1620/1898 Novum Organum or True Suggestions for the Interpretation of
Nature Verulam, Lord Francis (ed), London and New York.

Descartes, R. 1937/1960) Discourse on Method and Meditations . L. J. Lafleur

(trans.). New York: The Liberal Arts Press.

Fleck, L. 1979. Genesis and Development of a Scientific Fact. T. J. Trenn and R.K. Merton
(ed.), F. Bradley and T. J. Trenn (trans). Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
Goldhaber, A. S. and M.M. Nieto 2010) "Photon and graviton mass limits", Rev. Mod. Phys.
(American Physical Society) 82: 939-979.
Haraway, D. J. 1989. Primate Visions: Gender, Race, and Nature in the World of Modern
Science. London and New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Fox Keller, E 1985: Reflections on Gender and Science, New Haven/London: Yale
University Press.
Harding, S. 1991. Whose Science? Whose Knowledge? Thinking from Women's Lives. Ithaca,
NY: Cornell University Press.
Kuhn, T. 1962. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Martin, E. 1991. The egg and the sperm: How science has constructed a romance based on
stereotypical male and female roles. Signs (Journal of women in culture and society) 16(3):
485-501.
Rooney, P. 1991. Gendered reason: Sex metaphor and conceptions of reason. Hypatia 6(1):
77-103.

ESSENTIAL READINGS
Ziman, J., 1980, What is Science?, in Klemke, E. D., Hollinger, R., and Kline, A. D.,
eds., Introductory Readings in the Philosophy of Science: Buffalo, New York,
Prometheus Books, p. 35-54.

Haraway, D. 1991. Situated knowledge. In Simians, Cyborgs and women, pp.

Routledge.

New York. :

Harding, S. 1987. Is there a feminist method. In S. Harding ed. Feminism and methodology:
Social Science Issues, pp: Bloomington: Indian University Press.
Jayaratne, T. and A. Stewart. 1991. Quantitative and qualitative methods in the social
sciences: Current feminist issues and practical strategies. In M. Fonow and J. Cook ed.
Byeond methodology. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Martin, E.(1991). The Egg and the Sperm: How Science Has Constructed a Romance Based
on Stereotypical Male and Female Roles. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society ,
16(3), 485-501.

SUGGESTED READINGS
Anderson, E. 1995a. Knowledge, human interests and objectivity in feminist epistemology.
Philosophical topics 23(1): 27-58.
1995b. Uses of value judgements in science: A general argument with lessons from a case
study of feminist research on divorce. Hypatia 19(1): 1-24.
Hempel, C. G., and Oppenheim, P., 1953, The Logic of Explanation, in Feigl, H.,
and Brodbeck, M., eds., Readings in the Philosophy of Science: New York,
Appleton-Century-Crofts, p. 319-352.

Longino. H. 1989. Can there be a feminist science? Hypatia, Vol. 2, No. 3, Feminism &
Science, 1 (Autumn, 1987), pp. 51-64Published