Los valores como recursos epistémicos en las críticas feministas de la ciencia

Bibliographic References

• Almassi, B. (2019). Beyond Science Wars Redux: Feminist Philosophy of Science as Trustworthy Science Criticism. Hypatia, 34(4), 858-868. doi:10.1111/hypa.12500
• Altmann, J. (1974). Observational Study of Behavior: Sampling Methods. Behaviour, 49(3/4), pp. 227-267.
• Anderson, E. (1995). Knowledge, Human Interests, and Objectivity in Feminist Epistemology, Philosophical Topics, 23(2), 27-58.
• Anderson, E. (2004). Uses of Value Judgments in Science: A General Argument, with Lessons from a Case Study of Feminist Research on Divorce. Hypatia, 19(1), 1-24. doi:10.1111/j.1527-2001.2004.tb01266.x
• Anderson, E. (2020). Feminist Epistemology and Philosophy of Science, En E.N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2020 Edition). [[[https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/feminism-epistemology/]]]
• Antony L.M. (1993). Quine as Feminist. En L.M. Antony y C. Witt (Eds.), A Mind of One’s Own (pp. 185–225). Westview Press.
• Andreoletti, M. (2021). Replicability Crisis and Scientific Reforms: Overlooked Issues and Unmet Challenges, International Studies in the Philosophy of Science, 33(3), 135-151. doi:10.1080/02698595.2021.1943292
• Bluhm, R. (2016). Values and Evidence in Feminist Philosophy and in Neuroscience. En M.C. Amoretti y N. Vasallo (Eds.), Meta-Philosophical Reflection on Feminist Philosophies of Science (pp. 91-111). Boston Studies in the Philosophy and History of Science 317. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-26348-9_6
• Bluhm, R. (2021). Neurosexism and our understanding of sex differences in the brain. En S. Crasnow y K. Intemann (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Feminist Philosophy of Science (pp. 316-327). Routledge.
• Brigandt, I. (2015). Social values influence the adequacy conditions of scientific theories: beyond inductive risk. Canadian Journal of Philosophy, 45(3), 326–356. doi:10.1080/00455091.2015.1079004
• Botero, M. (2021). Observing Primates. Gender, Power, and Knowledge in Primatology, En S. Crasnow y K. Intemann (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Feminist Philosophy of Science (pp. 275-288). Routledge.
• Douglas, H. (2009). Science, Policy, and the Value-Free Ideal. University of Pittsburgh Press.
• Douglas H. (2016). Values in science. En P. Humphreys (Ed.). The Oxford Handbook of the Philosophy of Science (pp. 609-630). Oxford University Press.
• Eliot, L., Ahmed, A., Khan, H. y Patel, J. (2021). Dump the ‘dimorphism’: Comprehensive synthesis of human brain studies reveals few male-female differences beyond size. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 125, pp. 667-697.
• Elliott, K.C. y Steel, D. (Eds.) (2017). Current Controversies in Values and Science. Routledge.
• Farrell, K.N. (2020). Untrol: Post-Truth and the New Normal of Post-Normal Science, Social Epistemology, 34(4), 330-345. doi:10.1080/02691728.2019.17061172005.
• Fedigan, L.M. (2001). The Paradox of Feminist Primatology: The Goddess’s Discipline? En A.N.H. Creuger, E. Lurbekc y L. Schiebinger (Eds.), Feminism in Twentieth Century Science, Technology and Medicine (pp. 46-72). University of Chicago Press.
• Fedigan, L.M. (2005). Primatology is an equal-opportunity science. En C.L. Biggs y P.J. Downe (Eds.), Gendered Intersections: An Introduction to Women's and Gender Studies (pp. 362-366). Fernwood Publishing,
• Fee, E. (1979). Nineteenth-Century Craniology: The study of the female skull. Bulletin of the History of Medicine, 53(3), 415-433.
• Fernández Pinto, M. (2015). Tensions in agnotology: Normativity in the studies of commercially driven ignorance. Social Studies of Science, 45(2), 294-315.
• Fine, C. (2010). Delusions of Gender: How Our Minds, Society, and Neurosexism Create Difference. Norton.
• Fine, C. (2013). Is There Sexism in Functional Neuroimaging Investigations of Sex Differences? Neuroethics, 6(2), 369–409.
• Fine, C. (2021). Fairly Criticized, or Politicized? Conflicts in the Neuroscience of Sex Differences in the Human Brain. Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Biology. doi:10.1101/cshperspect.a039115
• Freese, J. y D. Peterson (2018). The Emergence of Statistical Objectivity: Changing Ideas of Epistemic Vice and Virtue in Science. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 36(3), 289-313. doi:10.1177/0735275118794987
• Funtowicz, S. y Ravetz, J. (1993). Science for the post-normal age. Futures, 25(7), 739-755.
• García-Sifuentes, Y. y Maney, D. (2021), Reporting and misreporting of sex differences in the biological sciences. eLife. doi:10.7554/eLife.70817
• González García, M.I. (2006). Epistemología feminista y práctica científica. En N. Blázquez y J. Flores (Eds.), Ciencia, Tecnología y Género en Iberoamérica (pp. 575-596). Centro de Investigaciones Interdisciplinares en Ciencias y Humanidades, UNAM.
• Haraway, D. (1984). Primatology is Politics by Other Means. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, 1984, 2, 489-524.
• Haraway, D. (1989). Primate Visions. Gender, Race, and Nature in the World of Modern Science. Routledge.
• Intemann, K. (2010). 25 Years of Feminist Empiricism and Standpoint Theory: Where Are We Now? Hypatia, 25(4), 778-796. doi:10.1111/j.1527-2001.2010.01138.x
• Intemann, K. (2017). Feminism, Values, and the Bias Paradox: Why Value Management is not Sufficient. En K.C. Elliott y D. Steel (Eds.), Current Controversies in Values and Science (pp. 130-144). Routledge.
• Intemann, K. (2021). Feminist Perspectives on Values in Science. En S. Crasnow y K. Intemann (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Feminist Philosophy of Science (pp. 201-215). Routledge.
• Joel, D., Berman, Z., Tavor, I., Wexler, N., Gaber, O., Stein, Y., et al. (2015). Sex beyond the Genitalia: The Human Brain Mosaic. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 112 (50), 15468-15473. doi:10.1073/pnas.1509654112
• Joel, D. y McCarthy, M. (2017). Incorporating Sex as a Biological Variable in Neuropsychiatric Research: Where Are We Now and Where Should We Be? Neuropsychopharmacology, 42(2), 379-385. doi: 10.1038/npp.2016.79
• Jordan-Young, R.M. (2010). Brain storm: The flaws in the science of sex difference. Harvard University Press.
• Kitcher, P. (1993). The Advancement of Science. Oxford University Press.
• Kourany, J. (2010). Philosophy of Science after Feminism. Oxford University Press.
• Koskinen I. y Rolin K. (2021). Distinguishing between legitimate and illegitimate roles for values in transdisciplinary research. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science Part A 91(1), 191-198. doi: 10.1016/j.shpsa.2021.12.001.
• Langlitz, N. y Strum, S. (2017). Baboons and the Origins of Actor-Network Theory. BioSocieties, 12(1), 158-167. doi:10.1057/s41292-016-0035-y
• Latour, B. (2004). Why has critique run out of steam? From Matters of Fact to Matters of Concern. Critical Inquiry, 30(2). doi:10.1086/421123
• Lee, S.K. (2018). Sex as important biological variable in biomedical research. BMB Reports, 51(4), pp. 167-173. doi:10.5483/BMBRep.2018.51.4.034
• Legg, T., Hatchard, J., Gilmore, A.B. (2021). The Science for Profit Model—How and why corporations influence science and the use of science in policy and practice. PLoS ONE, 16(6), e0253272. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0253272
• Lloyd, E. A. (1995). Objectivity and the Double Standard for Feminist Epistemologies. Synthese, 104(3), 351–381.
• Longino, H. (1990). Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry. Princeton University Press.
• Longino, H.E. (2002), The Fate of Knowledge. Princeton University Press.
• Longino, H. (2019). The Social Dimensions of Scientific Knowledge. En E.N. Zalta (Ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2019 Edition). [[[https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2019/entries/scientific-knowledge-social/]]]
• Lynch, M. (2020). We Have Never Been Anti-Science: Reflections on Science Wars and Post-Truth. Engaging Science, Technology and Society, 6, 49-57. doi:10.17351/ests2020.309
• Maney, D. (2016). Perils and pitfalls of reporting sex differences. Philosophical Transactions of The Royal Society B, 371(1688). doi:10.1098/rstb.2015.0119
• McCarthy, M.M. (2011). Reframing Sexual Differentiation of the Brain. Nature Neuroscience, 14(6), 677-683. doi:10.1038/nn.2834
• McMullin, E. (1983). Values in Science. PSA: Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association, 1982, 3–28.
• Michaels, D. (2008). Doubt is their product: how industry's assault on science threatens your health. Oxford University Press.
• Nelson, L.H. (1990). From Quine to Feminist Empiricism. Temple University Press.
• Nelson, L.H. (2017). Biology and Feminism. A Philosophical Introduction. Cambridge University Press.
• Oreskes, N. y Conway, E.M. (2010). Merchants of Doubt. Bloombury Press.
• Pérez Sedeño, E. y García Dauder, S. (2018). Las mentiras científicas sobre las mujeres. La Catarata.
• Persson, S. y Pownall, M. (2021). Can Open Science be a Tool to Dismantle Claims of Hardwired Brain Sex Differences? Opportunities and Challenges for Feminist Researchers. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 45(4), 493-504. doi:10.1177/03616843211037613
• Pinnick, C.L. (1994). Feminist Epistemology: Implications for Philosophy of Science. Philosophy of Science, 61(4), 646–657. doi:10.1086/289827
• Proctor, R. y Schiebinger, L. (Eds.) (2008). Agnotology: The Making and Unmaking of Ignorance. Stanford University Press.
• Resnik (2007). The Price of Truth. How Money Affects the Norms of Science. Oxford University Press.
• Reverter, S. (2017). El neurofeminismo frente a la investigación sobre la diferencia sexual. Daimon. Revista Internacional de Filosofía, 95–110. doi:10.6018/daimon/291561
• Richardson, S. (2021). Sex contextualism. Philosophy, Theory & Practice in Biology, 13(9). doi:10.3998/ptpbio.16039257.0013.009
• Rippon, G., Jordan-Young, R., Kaiser, A., Joel, D. y Fine, C. (2017). Journal of Neuroscience Research Policy on Addressing Sex as a Biological Variable: Comments, Clarifications, and Elaborations. Journal of Neuroscience Research, 95 (7), 1357-1359. doi:10.1002/jnr.24045.
• Rippon, G., Eliot, L., Genon, S., Joel, D. (2021). How hype and hyperbole distort the neuroscience of sex differences. PLoS Biology 19(5): e3001253. doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.3001253
• Rolin, K. (2002). Is 'science as social' a feminist insight? Social Epistemology, 16(3), 233-249. doi:10.1080/0269172022000025606
• Rowell, T. (2000). A few peculiar primates. En S. Strum y L. Fedigan (Eds.). Primate Encounters (pp. 57-70). The University of Chicago Press.
• Schrouff, J., Pischedda, D., Genon, S., Fryns, G., Pinho, A. L., Vassena, E., Liuzzi, A.G. y Ferrira, F.S. (2019). Gender bias in (neuro)science: Facts, consequences, and solutions. European Journal of Neuroscience, 50(7), 3094-3100. doi:10.1111/ejn.14397
• Schmitz, S. y Höppner, G. (2014). Neurofeminism and feminist neurosciences: a critical review of contemporary brain research. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 8(546). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2014.00546
• Siegel, J.A., Calogero, R.M., Eaton, A.A. y Roberts, T.A. (2021). Identifying Gaps and Building Bridges Between Feminist Psychology and Open Science. Psychology of Woman Quarterly, 45(4), pp. 407-411. doi:10.1177/03616843211044494
• Solís, C. (1994). Razones e intereses: la historia de la ciencia después de Kuhn. Paidós.
• Solomon, M. (2001). Social Empiricism. MIT Press.
• Solomon, M. (2012). Socially Responsible Science and the Unity of Values. Perspectives on Science, 20(3), 331-338.
• Strum, S. (1987). Almost Human: A Journey into the World of Baboons. Random House.
• Strum, S.C. y L.M. Fedigan (eds.) (2000). Primate Encounters. Models of Science, Gender, and Society. University of Chicago Press.
• Tang-Martínez, Z. (2020). The history and impact of women in animal behaviour and the ABS: A North American Perspective. Animal Behaviour, 164, pp. 251-260.
• Toole, B. (2020). Demarginalizing Standpoint Epistemology. Episteme, 1-19. doi:10-1017/epi.2020.8