Publication Type:


Transliteration of original Title: 
Gendernye metafory v obraze nauki F. Bekona
Natalya Martishina
PhD, Professor of Siberian Transport University
Issue number: 
No. 2 (Vol. 40)

The idea of the feminist philosophy of science about classical science as masculine enterprise is discussed. An interpretation of this evaluation as a key metaphor that can be used for description of the classical science is proposed. It is demonstrated that masculinity is a characteristic not only of the classical science, but also of the image of science in common notions. (The image of science is defined as the whole representation about the nature of science and it’s place in human existence which exists in professional and / or mass consciousness). Gender features of philosophical image of the classical science are identified on the base of analysis of linguistic tools which Francis Bacon has used for the description of science. Two main metaphors used by Francis Bacon to describe the scientific knowledge are: 1) idea of journey, way which expands horizons, and 2) idea of practical work what uses proper tools. At the F. Bacon`s epoch both of them are associated with men`s activity only. The main types of practical work used for comparison with science are architecture and house-building, land cultivation and mining. Then, there are a number of additional metaphors in which scientific research is described in terms of war, hunting and game; they are associated with masculine practice too. Analysis also provides expanded metaphor in which science is presented as a female divinity (Sphinx). It seems to make gender image of science more compound but we see the idea of Reason as force which researches, invades into and masters the Sphinx. So, this metaphor proposes the masculine interpretation of the figure of scientist too. The author makes the conclusion that construction of science as masculine enterprise is not only the feature of the classic science as the objectified system of research, but also the implicit image of science that exists in the mentality of the philosophers and scientists of New Ages. Transition from classical to non-classical science is marked by change of key metaphors, and feminine ones appear among them.

image of science, philosophical metaphors, classical science, Francis Bacon.

Bacon F. New Organon. Bacon F. Works. T. 2. M.: Mysl', 1978. P. 5 – 214.

Bacon F. De Sapientia Veterum. Bacon F. Works. T. 2. M.: Mysl', 1978. P. 231 – 300.

Bacon F. Essays or Counsels, Civil and Moral. Bacon F. Works. T. 2. M.: Mysl', 1978. P. 349 – 480.

Bazhenov L. B. “Analysis of antiscientific trends in social consciousness” (“Analiz antiscientistskikh tendenciy v obshchestvennom soznanii”). Problema cennostnogo statusa nauki na rubezhe XXI v (The problem of the status of the value of science in the beginning of the XXIst century). Saint-Petersburg, 1999, pp. 209 – 221.

Kont O. Dukh pozitivnoy filosofii (Comte О. The Spirit of the Positive Prilosophy). Rostov-na-Donu, Feniks, 2003.

Dekart R. Pravila rukovodstva uma (Descartes R. Rules for the Direction of the Mind). Dekart R. Sochineniya. Мoscow, 1978. Pp. 77-153.

Elkana Y. A Programmatic Attempt at an Anthropology of Knowledge. E. Mendelssohn and Y. Elkana (eds.) Sciences and Cultures: Anthropological and historical studies of the sciences. Boston: D. Reidel Publishing Company, 1981.

Heidegger M. Vremja i bytie (Time and Being). Moscow, Respublika, 1993, pp. 41 – 62.

Holton G. What is antiscience? (Chto takoe antinauka). Voprosy filosofii. 1992, no. 2, pp. 26 – 58.

Horkheimer M., Adorno T. Dialekrika Prosvescsheniya: Filosofskie framenty (Dialectic of Enlightenment: Philosophical fragments). Moscow, Medium, Juventa, 1997.

Jurevich A. V. Science under mediacracy (Nauka pri mediakratii). Naukovedenie. 2002, no. 1, pp. 69 – 85.

Kasavin I.T. Tekst. Diskurs. Kontekst: Vvedenie v social'nuyu epistemologiyu yazyka (Text, Discourse, Context. Introduction into social epistemology of language). Moscow, 2008.

Lapshin I. I. Filosofiya izobreteniya i izobretenie v filosofii (Philosophy of invention and invention in philosophy). Moscow, Respublika. 1999.

Laptev V.V., Pisareva S.A. Tryapicina A. P. Scientific degree in Russia: problems and perspectives (Uchenaya stepen' v Rossii: problemy i perspektivy). Vysshee obrazovanie v Rossii – Higher education in Russia..2013, no. 4, pp. 26 – 37.

Lloyd G. The Man of Reason. Zhenshhiny, poznanie i real'nost': issledovaniya po feministskoy filosofii. Moscow, 2005, pp. 132 – 151.

Markova L.A. Science without truth, subject, object: what is next? (Nauka bez istiny, sub’ekta i obekta: chto dal'she?) Epistemology and Philosophy of Science - Epistemologiya i filosofiya nauki. 2011, no.4, pp. 51 – 59.

Nikiforov A. L. Sense-verbal construction of a life-world (Chuvstvenno-verbal'noe postroenie predmetnogo mira). Epistemology and Philosophy of Science - Epistemologiya i filosofiya nauki. 2011, no.1, pp. 34 – 54.

Potter E. Feminism and Philosophy of science: An Introduction. London and New York: Routledge: Taylor & Fransis Group, 2006.

Terpilovskaja E.A. “Image of science as a concept of Russian philosophy” (“Obraz nauki kak koncept v otechestvennoy filosofii”). Istoriya i filosofiya nauki: Sbornik statey po materialam Vserossiyskoy nauchnoy konferentsii. Ul'janovsk, 2012, pp. 129 – 132.

enter doi
Full Text: