Since the 1960s the bio/technosciences have occupied a central place in philosophical thinking. The paper sets out three theoretical configurations embodying major challenges for today’s gender studies in philosophy, since they raise an obstacle, each in its own way, to the discussion on implications of the bio/technosciences in the political field and the area of gender theory: firstly naturalism in the field of the philosophy of science; secondly the paradigm of applied ethics; and thirdly the discourse of philosophical anthropology that has been reactivated in philosophical debates about the bio/technosciences. To conclude, some of the future tasks will be mentioned which fall to gender studies in philosophy.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alaimo, S. ( 2008) ‘Trans-corporeal feminisms and the ethical space of nature,’ in S. Alaimo and S. Hekman (eds), Material Feminisms, p. 237-264. Bloomington & Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.
2.
Alcoff, L. M. and Kittay, E. F. (eds) (2007) The Blackwell Guide to Feminist Philosophy. Malden and Oxford: Blackwell.
3.
Block, N. ( 2003) ‘Neurophilosophy or Philoneuroscience, ’ Science310: 1328-1329.
4.
Dennett, D.C. ( 1991) Consciousness Explained. Boston, MA : Little, Brown & Co.
5.
Franklin, S. ( 1995) ‘Postmodern Procreation: A Cultural Account of Assisted Reproduction,’ in F. Ginsburg and R. Rapp (eds), Conceiving the New World Order. The Global Politics of Reproduction, p. 323-345. Berkeley, Los Angeles and London: University of California Press .
6.
Fraser, N. ( 1990) ‘Struggle over Needs: Outline of a Socialist-Feminist Critical Theory of Late-Capitalist Political Culture,’ in Women, the State, and Welfare: Historical and Theoretical Perspectives, ed. Linda Gordon, p. 205-231. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.
7.
Goebel, B. ( 2005) ‘Probleme eines philosophischen Naturalismus,’ in B. Goebel, A. M. Hauk, G. Kruip (eds), Probleme des Naturalismus. Philosophische Beiträge, p. 23-42. Paderborn: Mentis.
8.
Habermas, J. ( 2001) Die Zukunft der menschlichen Natur. Auf dem Weg zu einer liberalen Eugenik?Frankfurt/ Main: Suhrkamp.
9.
Haraway, D. ( 1988) ‘Situated Knowledges: The Science Question in Feminism and the Privilege of a Partial Perspective,’ Feminist Studies14(3): 575-599.
10.
Jonsen, A.R. ( 1998) The Birth of Bioethics. New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press.
11.
Keil, G. ( 2001) ‘Rorty und der Eliminative Materialismus - eine Mesalliance?’ in Th. Schäfer, U. Tietz and R. Zill (eds), Hinter den Spiegeln. Beiträge zur Philosophie Richard Rortys mit Erwiderungen von Richard Rorty, p. 56-72. Frankfurt/Main : Suhrkamp.
12.
Keil, G. ( 2005) ‘Anthropologischer und ethischer Naturalismus,’ in B. Goebel, A.M. Hauk and G. Kruip (eds) Probleme des Naturalismus. Philosophische Beiträge, p. 65-100. Paderborn: Mentis.
13.
Keil, G. and Schnädelbach, H. ( 2000) ‘Naturalismus’ in G. Keil, and H. Schnädelbach, Naturalismus. Philosophische Beiträge, p. 7-45Frankfurt/Main : Suhrkamp.
14.
Klinger, C. ( 2005) ‘Feministische Theorie zwischen Lektüre und Kritik des philosophischen Kanons,’ in H. Bußmann and R. Hof (eds), Genus. Geschlechterforschung/Gender Studies in den Kultur- und Sozialwissenschaften, p. 329-364. Stuttgart: Kröner.
15.
Latour, B. ( 1994) ‘On Technical Mediation - Philosophy, Sociology , Genealogy,’ Common Knowledge3(2): 29-64.
16.
Lindemann, H. ( 2007) ‘Feminist Bioethics: Where We’ve Been, Where We’re Going,’ in L. M. Alcoff and E. F. Kittay (eds) The Blackwell Guide to Feminist Philosophy, p. 116-130. Malden and Oxford : Blackwell Publishers.
17.
McNeil, M. ( 2007) Feminist Cultural Studies of Science and Technology. London and New York: Routledge .
18.
Metzinger, Th. ( 1993) Subjekt und Selbstmodell. Die Perspektivität phänomenalen Bewußtseins vor dem Hintergrund einer naturalistischen Theorie mentaler Repräsentation. Paderborn, München, Wien an Zürich : Schoeningh.
19.
Nagl-Docekal, H. ( 2004) Feminist Philosophy. Boulder and Oxford : Westview Press.
20.
Nicholas, B. ( 1999) ‘Strategies for Effective Transformation,’ in A. Donchin and L. M. Purdy (eds), Embodying Bioethics. Recent Feminist Advances, p. 239-252. Lanham and Boulder: Rowman & Littlefield.
21.
Putnam, H. ( 1975) ‘Philosophy and our Mental Life,’ in H. Putnam, Mind, Language and Reality. Philosophical Papers. Vol. 2, p. 291-303. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
22.
Sellars, W. ( 1963) Science, Perception, and Reality. London: Routledge.
23.
Sherwin, S. ( 2001) ‘Feminist Reflections on the Role of Theories in a Global Bioethics,’ in R. Tong , G. Anderson and A. Santos (eds), Globalising Feminist Bioethics . Crosscultural Perspectives, p. 12-26. Boulder and Oxford: Westview Press.
24.
Sloterdijk, P. ( 2001a) ‘Domestikation des Seins. Die Verdeutlichung der Lichtung,’ in P. Sloterdijk, Nicht gerettet. Versuche nach Heidegger, p. 142-234. Frankfurt/Main: Suhrkamp.
25.
Sloterdijk, P. ( 2001b) ‘Regeln für den Menschenpark. Ein Antwortschreiben zu Heideggers Brief über den Humanismus’, in P. Sloterdijk, Nicht gerettet. Versuche nach Heidegger, p. 302-337. Frankfurt/Main : Suhrkamp.
