Women in philosophy : problems with the discrimination hypothesis

Neven SESARDIC, Rafael DE CLERCQ

Research output: Journal PublicationsJournal Article (refereed)

3 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

A number of philosophers attribute the underrepresentation of women in philosophy largely to bias against women or some kind of wrongful discrimination. They cite six sources of evidence to support their contention: (1) gender disparities that increase along the path from undergraduate student to full-time faculty member; (2) anecdotal accounts of discrimination in philosophy; (3) research on gender bias in the evaluation of manuscripts, grants, and curricula vitae in other academic disciplines; (4) psychological research on implicit bias; (5) psychological research on stereotype threat; and (6) the relatively small number of articles written from a feminist perspective in leading philosophy journals. In each case, we find that proponents of the discrimination hypothesis, who include distinguished philosophers in fields such as philosophy of science, metaphysics, and philosophy of language, have tended to present evidence selectively. Occasionally they have even presented as evidence what appears to be something more dubious—for example, studies supporting the discrimination hypothesis based on data that have been reported “lost” under suspicious circumstances. It is not the aim of this paper to settle the question of the causes of female underrepresentation in philosophy. Rather, we argue that, contrary to what many philosophers claim, the overall information available does not support the discrimination hypothesis.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)461-473
Number of pages13
JournalAcademic Questions
Volume27
Issue number4
Early online date23 Oct 2014
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2014

Fingerprint

discrimination
trend
philosophy of language
evidence
metaphysics
philosophy of science
gender
available information
grant
stereotype
philosophy
threat
curriculum
cause
present
evaluation
student

Keywords

  • Stereotype Threat
  • Gender Disparity
  • Stanford Encyclopedia
  • Feminist Philosophy
  • Female Applicant

Cite this

@article{6b1dc2b8c5da4eb6a141508629566a48,
title = "Women in philosophy : problems with the discrimination hypothesis",
abstract = "A number of philosophers attribute the underrepresentation of women in philosophy largely to bias against women or some kind of wrongful discrimination. They cite six sources of evidence to support their contention: (1) gender disparities that increase along the path from undergraduate student to full-time faculty member; (2) anecdotal accounts of discrimination in philosophy; (3) research on gender bias in the evaluation of manuscripts, grants, and curricula vitae in other academic disciplines; (4) psychological research on implicit bias; (5) psychological research on stereotype threat; and (6) the relatively small number of articles written from a feminist perspective in leading philosophy journals. In each case, we find that proponents of the discrimination hypothesis, who include distinguished philosophers in fields such as philosophy of science, metaphysics, and philosophy of language, have tended to present evidence selectively. Occasionally they have even presented as evidence what appears to be something more dubious—for example, studies supporting the discrimination hypothesis based on data that have been reported “lost” under suspicious circumstances. It is not the aim of this paper to settle the question of the causes of female underrepresentation in philosophy. Rather, we argue that, contrary to what many philosophers claim, the overall information available does not support the discrimination hypothesis.",
keywords = "Stereotype Threat, Gender Disparity, Stanford Encyclopedia, Feminist Philosophy, Female Applicant",
author = "Neven SESARDIC and {DE CLERCQ}, Rafael",
year = "2014",
month = "12",
doi = "10.1007/s12129-014-9464-x",
language = "English",
volume = "27",
pages = "461--473",
journal = "Academic Questions",
issn = "0895-4852",
publisher = "Springer New York",
number = "4",

}

Women in philosophy : problems with the discrimination hypothesis. / SESARDIC, Neven; DE CLERCQ, Rafael.

In: Academic Questions, Vol. 27, No. 4, 12.2014, p. 461-473.

Research output: Journal PublicationsJournal Article (refereed)

TY - JOUR

T1 - Women in philosophy : problems with the discrimination hypothesis

AU - SESARDIC, Neven

AU - DE CLERCQ, Rafael

PY - 2014/12

Y1 - 2014/12

N2 - A number of philosophers attribute the underrepresentation of women in philosophy largely to bias against women or some kind of wrongful discrimination. They cite six sources of evidence to support their contention: (1) gender disparities that increase along the path from undergraduate student to full-time faculty member; (2) anecdotal accounts of discrimination in philosophy; (3) research on gender bias in the evaluation of manuscripts, grants, and curricula vitae in other academic disciplines; (4) psychological research on implicit bias; (5) psychological research on stereotype threat; and (6) the relatively small number of articles written from a feminist perspective in leading philosophy journals. In each case, we find that proponents of the discrimination hypothesis, who include distinguished philosophers in fields such as philosophy of science, metaphysics, and philosophy of language, have tended to present evidence selectively. Occasionally they have even presented as evidence what appears to be something more dubious—for example, studies supporting the discrimination hypothesis based on data that have been reported “lost” under suspicious circumstances. It is not the aim of this paper to settle the question of the causes of female underrepresentation in philosophy. Rather, we argue that, contrary to what many philosophers claim, the overall information available does not support the discrimination hypothesis.

AB - A number of philosophers attribute the underrepresentation of women in philosophy largely to bias against women or some kind of wrongful discrimination. They cite six sources of evidence to support their contention: (1) gender disparities that increase along the path from undergraduate student to full-time faculty member; (2) anecdotal accounts of discrimination in philosophy; (3) research on gender bias in the evaluation of manuscripts, grants, and curricula vitae in other academic disciplines; (4) psychological research on implicit bias; (5) psychological research on stereotype threat; and (6) the relatively small number of articles written from a feminist perspective in leading philosophy journals. In each case, we find that proponents of the discrimination hypothesis, who include distinguished philosophers in fields such as philosophy of science, metaphysics, and philosophy of language, have tended to present evidence selectively. Occasionally they have even presented as evidence what appears to be something more dubious—for example, studies supporting the discrimination hypothesis based on data that have been reported “lost” under suspicious circumstances. It is not the aim of this paper to settle the question of the causes of female underrepresentation in philosophy. Rather, we argue that, contrary to what many philosophers claim, the overall information available does not support the discrimination hypothesis.

KW - Stereotype Threat

KW - Gender Disparity

KW - Stanford Encyclopedia

KW - Feminist Philosophy

KW - Female Applicant

UR - https://www.nas.org/articles/women_in_philosophy_problems_with_the_discrimination_hypothesis

UR - http://commons.ln.edu.hk/sw_master/1888

UR - https://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?eid=2-s2.0-84917737624&doi=10.1007%2fs12129-014-9464-x&partnerID=40&md5=a24486fab4546bc2b2a47ffecce969fa

U2 - 10.1007/s12129-014-9464-x

DO - 10.1007/s12129-014-9464-x

M3 - Journal Article (refereed)

VL - 27

SP - 461

EP - 473

JO - Academic Questions

JF - Academic Questions

SN - 0895-4852

IS - 4

ER -