-
5Women and Violence: Feminist Practice and Quantitative MethodIn Sandra Burt & Lorraine Code (eds.), Changing Methods: Feminists Transforming Practice, Broadview Press. pp. 301-325. 1995.
-
5On 'Capturing Facts Alive in the Past': Response to Fotiadis and LittleAmerican Antiquity 59 (3): 556-560. 1994.Michael Fotiadis (1994) and Barbara Little (1994) both question the oppositions that structure current debate about the "objectivity" of archaeological science; they raise concerns about my own proposal for a "mitigated objectivism" where it reaffirms these oppositions. I welcome their discussion and offer three responses to clarify and situate my own position. Most valuable, they identify several lines of inquiry that should be pursued beyond the philosophical analyses I have developed, in this…Read more
-
5Reflections on the Work of the SAA Committee for Ethics in ArchaeologyCanadian Journal of Archaeology 24 (2): 151-156. 2001.During the 1998 Victoria CAA conference, an afternoon was devoted to a plenary discussion on the future of archaeology in Canada, and particularly the role the CAA should take in this future. The plenary was divided into two sections. First, a series of presenters discussed the future of Canadian archaeology from their particular vantage at the intersection of government, academe, First Nations and private industry. The second half of the plenary consisted of a series of presentations from CAA c…Read more
-
5The Philosophy of Ambivalence: Sandra Harding on The Science Question in FeminismCanadian Journal of Philosophy, Supplementary Volume 13 (n/a): 58-73. 1987.In the past three decades scholars in virtually every humanistic and social scientific research discipline, and in some natural sciences, have drawn attention to quite striking instances of gender bias in the modes of practice and theorizing typical of traditional fields of research. They generally begin by identifying explicit androcentric biases in definitions of the subject domains appropriate to specific scientific fields. Their primary targets, in this connection, have been research that le…Read more
-
4Contextualizing Ethics: Comments on ‘Ethics in Canadian Archaeology’ by Robert RosenswigCanadian Journal of Archaeology 21 115-120. 1997.
-
4Good Science, Bad Science, or Science as Usual?: Feminist Critiques of ScienceIn Lori D. Hager (ed.), Women in Human Evolution, Routledge. pp. 29-55. 1997.I am often asked what feminism can possibly have to do with science. Feminism is, after all, an explicitly partisan, political standpoint; what bearing could it have on science, an enterprise whose hallmark is a commitment to value-neutrality and objectivity? Is feminism not a set of personal, political convictions best set aside (bracketed) when you engage in research as a scientist? I will argue that feminism has both critical and constructive relevance for a wide range of sciences, and that f…Read more
-
4Reasoning About Ourselves: Feminist Methodology in the Social SciencesIn Elizabeth D. Harvey & Kathleen Okruhlik (eds.), Women and Reason, . pp. 225-244. 1992.
-
4Standpoint TheoryIn Robert Audi (ed.), Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, Cambridge University Press. pp. 1021-1022. 1999.Standpoint theory is an explicitly political as well as social epistemology. It’s distinctive features are commitment to understand the social locations that shape the epistemic capacities and resources of individuals in structural terms, and a recognition that those who are marginalized within hierarchically structured systems of social differentiation are often epistemically advantaged. In some crucial domains they know more and know better as a contingent function of their situated experience…Read more
-
3On a Hierarchy of Purposes: Typological Theory and PracticeCurrent Anthropology 33 (4): 486-491. 1992.
-
3Bootstrapping in Un-Natural Sciences: Archaeological Theory TestingPSA Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association 1986 (1): 314-321. 1986.Glymour’s boostrapping account of confirmation is meant to show how it is that evidence can bear on a theory in a discriminating, noncircular way even when that theory is used to establish the inferential link between evidence and a test hypothesis. Evidence confirms a theory on his account if, “using the theory, we can deduce from the evidence an instance of the hypothesis i.e., an hypothesis comprising or instantiating the test theory, and the deduction is such that it does not guarantee that …Read more
-
3Doing Social Science as a Feminist: The Engendering of ArchaeologyIn Angela N. H. Creager, Elizabeth Lunbeck & Londa Schiebinger (eds.), Feminism in Twentieth Century Science, Technology, and Medicine, University of Chicago Press. pp. 23-45. 2001.
-
2The 'Illusion of Concreteness' and the Prospects for an Anthropology of Archaeology: Review of Explanation in Archaeology by Guy GibbonAmerican Anthropologist 94 (1). 1992.
-
2Standpoint Matters, in Archaeology for ExampleIn Shirley C. Strum & Linda M. Fedigan (eds.), Primate Encounters: Models of Science, Gender, and Society, University of Chicago Press. pp. 243-260. 2000.
-
2On EthicsIn Larry Zimmerman, Karen D. Vitelli & Julie Hollowell-Zimmer (eds.), Handbook on Ethical Issues in Archaeology, Altamira Press. pp. 3-16. 2003.
-
2Philosophical Feminism: A Bibliographic Guide to Critiques of ScienceResources for Feminist Research 19 (2): 2-36. 1990.
-
2Moderate Relativism/Political ObjectivismIn Ronald F. Williamson & Michael S. Bisson (eds.), The Archaeology of Bruce Trigger: Theoretical Empiricism, Mcgill-queens University Press. pp. 25-35. 2006.
-
1The Constitution of Archaeological Evidence: Gender Politics and ScienceIn Peter Galison & David J. Stump (eds.), The Disunity of Science: Boundaries, Contexts, and Power, Stanford University Press. pp. 311-343. 1996.
-
1Feminist Philosophy of ScienceIn Encyclopedia of Philosophy Supplement, Macmillan. pp. 191-194. 1996.
-
The Demystification of the ProfessionIn Joan M. Gero, David M. Lacy & Michael L. Blakey (eds.), The Socio-Politics of Archaeology, University of Massachusetts. pp. 119-129. 1983.
-
Why Should Historical Archaeologists Study Capitalism?: The Logic of Question and Answer and the Challenge of Systemic AnalysisIn Mark P. Leone & Parker B. Potter (eds.), Historical Archaeologies of Capitalism, Kluwer Academic. pp. 23-50. 1999.
-
Review of Naturalism and Social Science by David ThomasInternational Studies in Philosophy 14 104-106. 1982.
-
The Interpretive DilemmaIn Valerie Pinsky & Alison Wylie (eds.), Critical Traditions in Contemporary Archaeology, Cambridge University Press. pp. 18-28. 1989.
-
Reassessing the Profile and Needs of Battered WomenCanadian Journal of Community Mental Health 7 (2): 292-303. 1988.
-
Afterword: On WavesIn Pamela L. Geller & Miranda K. Stockett (eds.), Feminist Anthropology: Past, Present, and Future, University of Pennsylvania Press. pp. 167-176. 2006.
-
Archaeology and Philosophy of ScienceIn N. J. Smelser & Paul B. Baltes (eds.), International Encyclopedia of the Social and Behavioral Sciences, Pergamon Press. pp. 614-617. 2001.
Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada