new topic

[M. J. Hardman]

>Janet Bing
>I think there's probably a general agreement that GALA wants to be as
>inclusive as possible and not self-identify as an exclusively
>feminist organization, but I do have to question Chris's belief that
>"science requires neutrality," perhaps because I've read too many of
>Stephen J. Gould's books.  It's a lot healthier to admit and attempt
>to compensate for our biases than to assume we're capable of
>neutrality.
>
Thank you!  That also is what I am saying.  I have been impressed at the
absolute consistency with which whatever women do or say, in all of the
postings that we have been had, is placed second to what men do, for
example.  How well we know, now, that, thanks to people like Keller and
Tickner and Gilligan among others, that there *is* no science that is
*neutral* simply because all science takes place in language and language
is that which is infuses all that is human, as we as linguists do indeed
know.  I just finished another Field Methods course -- where students
learn, by direct personal experience, the power of the patterns they come
in with and how to go about working with and around the knowledge of
their own patterns in order to perceive the other -- *objectivity* is an
impossibility; it is as you say.