Since the seventies, the definition of scientific knowledge has undergone major shifts. However, game researchers do not sufficiently reflect upon those epistemological changes. This paper suggests that to make game studies more inclusive—for women especially and diverse voices in general—game researchers need to shift from traditional, objective epistemologies toward pragmatist ones instead. To support such an argument, this paper first focuses on the central concepts of pragmatist feminist epistemology: experience, rationality, situation and fallibilism. Those concepts are then used for a rereading of game studies epistemological stances. I argue that game studies initially adhered to traditional epistemologies, which formed hostile attitudes toward women and minorities in the field. On the contrary, several authors now develop their scholarship congruently with a feminist pragmatist epistemology. Their works are analyzed to observe how pragmatist feminist concepts concretely manifest in research.
AarsethE. (2014). Ludology. In M.J.P.Wolf & B.Perron (Eds.), The Routledge companion to video game studies (pp. 211–215). Routledge.
3.
AarsethE. (2019). Game studies: How to play—Ten play-tips for the aspiring game-studies scholar. Game studies, 19(2), 1–5. https://gamestudies.org/1902/articles/howtoplay
4.
AndersonE. (2014). Feminist epistemology and philosophy of science. In ZaltaE. N. (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Summer 2019 ed. online (pp. 1–30). Stanford University.
AuclairL.RoulinJ.-L. (Eds.). (2006). Psychologie cognitive: Premier et second cycles universitaires (2° edn). Editions Bréal.
7.
BiestaG. (2010). Pragmatism and the philosophical foundations of mixed methods research. In TashakkoriA.TeddlieC. (Eds.), Sage handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 95–118). Sage.
8.
BiestaG.BurbulesN. (2003). Pragmatism and educational research. Rowman & Littlefield.
9.
ChiapelloL. (2016). From "spectator knowledge" to "pragmatic knowledge": how a philosophical understanding of knowledge can help create better video game tutorials. The Philosophy of Computer Games Conference: Knowledge, Valletta, Malta, November 1-4. http://gamephilosophy.org/pcg2016/site/assets/files/1015/chiapello_-_from_spectator_knowledge_to_pragmatic_knowledge.pdf.
10.
ChiapelloL. (2017). Epistemological underpinnings in game design research. In LankoskiP.HolopainenJ. (Eds.), Game design research: An introduction to theory & practice (pp. 15–33). Carnegie Mellon University ETC Press.
11.
ComettiJ.-P. (2010). Qu’est-ce que le pragmatisme ? . Gallimard.
12.
CrossN. (2006). Designerly ways of knowing. Springer.
13.
de Sousa SantosB. (2016). Epistemologies of the South: Justice against epistemicide. Routledge.
DeweyJ. (1938). Logic: The theory of inquiry. Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
17.
EskelinenM. (2001). The gaming situation. Game Studies, 1(1), 1–13. https://www.gamestudies.org/0101/eskelinen/
18.
FrascaG. (2003). Simulation versus Narrative: Introduction to Ludology. In WolfM. J. P.PerronB. (Eds.), The video game theory reader (pp. 221–235). Routledge.
19.
GrasswickH. E. (2011). Feminist epistemology and philosophy of science: Power in knowledge. Springer Science & Business Media.
20.
GrayK. L.LeonardD. J. (2018). Woke gaming: Digital challenges to oppression and social injustice. University of Washington Press.
21.
GrayK. L.VoorheesG.VossenE. (2018). Feminism in play. Springer.
22.
HarawayD. (1988). Situated knowledges: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies, 14(3), 575–599. https://doi.org/10.2307/3178066
23.
HardingS.G. (1986). The science question in feminism. Cornell University Press.
24.
HarveyA.FisherS. (2015). “Everyone can make games!”: The post-feminist context of women in digital game production. Feminist Media Studies, 15(4), 576–592. https://doi.org/10.1080/14680777.2014.958867
25.
HarveyA.ShepherdT. (2017). When passion isn’t enough: Gender, affect and credibility in digital games design. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 20(5), 492–508. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367877916636140
26.
HeldkeL. (2017). John Dewey and pragmatist feminist philosophy. In SFesmire (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Dewey (pp. 271–290). Oxford University Press.
27.
HeldkeL. M. (1987). Coresponsible inquiry: Objectivity from Dewey to feminist epistemology [Ph. D. Dissertation]. Northwestern University.
28.
HildebrandD. (2008). Dewey: A beginner’s guide. Oneworld Publications.
HuntemannN.AslingerB. (2016). Gaming globally: Production, play, and place. Palgrave Macmillan.
31.
JanishE. (2018). Shoot the gun inside: Doubt and feminist epistemology in video games. In GrayK. L.VoorheesG.VossenE. (Eds.), Feminism in play (pp. 221–234). Springer.
32.
JenningsS. C. (2018). The horrors of transcendent knowledge: A feminist-epistemological approach to video games. In GrayK. L.LeonardD. J. (Eds.), Woke gaming: Digital challenges to oppression and social injustice (pp. 155–171). University of Washington Press.
33.
JensonJ.De CastellS. (2010). Gender, simulation, and gaming: Research review and redirections. Simulation & Gaming, 41(1), 51–71. https://doi.org/10.1177/1046878109353473
JørgensenK.FassoneR. (2020). Introduction: Locating the taboos of game studies. Games as Art, Media, Entertainment: The Taboos of Game Studies, 1(9), 1–5. https://www.gamejournal.it/intro-taboos/
Le MoigneJ.-L. (2012). Les épistémologies constructivistes. « Que sais-je ? ». Que sais-je ?Presses Universitaires de France.
38.
MäyräF. (2020). Game culture studies and the politics of scholarship. Games as Art, Media, Entertainment: The Taboos of Game Studies, 1(9), 11–31. https://www.gamejournal.it/game-culture/
39.
MillerD. (2021). Justice. The Stanford encyclopedia of philosophy. E. N. Zalta. https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/fall2021/entries/justice/
40.
MoserP. K.vander NatA. (Eds.). (2003). Human knowledge: Classical and contemporary approaches. Oxford University Press.
41.
MurrayJ. (2005). ‘The Last Word on Ludology vs. Narratology’, DIGRA 2005 conference, Vancouver, Canada.
42.
MurrayJ. H. (2016 [1997]). Hamlet on the holodeck: The future of narrative in cyberspace. The free press Simon&Shuster.
43.
NunesJ. A. (2009). Rescuing epistemology. RCCS Annual Review. A Selection from the Portuguese Journal Revista Crítica de Ciências Sociais [Online], 1, 95–120. https://doi.org/10.4000/rccsar.165
44.
Núñez-PachecoR.Penix-TadsenP. (2021). Divergent theoretical trajectories in Game Studies: a bibliographical review. Artnodes, 28, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.7238/artnodes.v0i28.380176
SeigfriedC. H. (ed.) (2010). Feminist interpretations of John Dewey. Pennsylvania State University Press.
52.
SmithL. T. (2021). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. Bloomsbury Publishing.
53.
StreetZ. (2017). Queering games history: Complexities, chaos, and community. In RubergB.ShawA. (Eds.), Queer game studies (pp. 35–42). University of Minnesota Press.
54.
Thayer-BaconB. (2003). Relational “(e)pistemologies”. Peter Lang.
55.
Thayer-BaconB. (2010). A pragmatist and feminist relational (e)pistemology. European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy, 2(II-1), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.4000/ejpap.948
