Contextualism in Feminist Epistemology and Philosophy of Science

Abstract

I introduce a contextualist theory of epistemic justification in order to defend Helen Longino’s contextual empiricism against three criticisms. The critics claim that contextual empiricism (1) implies dogmatism with respect to standards of argumentation, (2) lacks naturalistic justification, and (3) implies relativism with respect to moral and social values. I argue that the three criticisms fail. If we understand contextual empiricism as a contextualist theory of epistemic justification, standards of argumentation do not need to be adopted dogmatically, Longino’s social account of objectivity is justified in virtue of advancing epistemic responsibility, and her account of objectivity does not imply that any moral and social values are acceptable in scientific debates.