Mangraviti, Franci. Feminist Logic, Broadly Speaking
2025, Synthese, 206: 82
Added by: Viviane Fairbank
Abstract:
I argue that the continued focus on the possibility question - whether feminist logic can exist as a respectable practice - has several harmful consequences. First, it in-vites the association of feminist logic with substantial positions in the philosophy of logic, which unnecessarily leaves room for dismissing the field a priori. Second, it invites a systematic reading of feminist logicians as arguing in isolation from their logical practice, which can hide some genuine possibilities for the field. To avoid these issues, I propose a very broad characterization of feminist logic as a kind of practice which addresses some harmful aspect of dominant practices by focusing on their interaction with logical practices. This characterization trivializes the possibil-ity question, enforces no particular conception of logic to the exclusion of others, yet leaves room for both conservative and radical approaches.
I argue that the continued focus on the possibility question - whether feminist logic can exist as a respectable practice - has several harmful consequences. First, it in-vites the association of feminist logic with substantial positions in the philosophy of logic, which unnecessarily leaves room for dismissing the field a priori. Second, it invites a systematic reading of feminist logicians as arguing in isolation from their logical practice, which can hide some genuine possibilities for the field. To avoid these issues, I propose a very broad characterization of feminist logic as a kind of practice which addresses some harmful aspect of dominant practices by focusing on their interaction with logical practices. This characterization trivializes the possibil-ity question, enforces no particular conception of logic to the exclusion of others, yet leaves room for both conservative and radical approaches.
Comment: This paper gives a nice summary of the debate concerning the "possibility question" in feminist logic, and argues that the question itself is unproductive. As such, it would be usefully included as a reading in any course that touches on feminist or other sociopolitical approaches to logic. It cites much of the contemporary literature on this topic, and so could also be used as an introductory survey, though some background knowledge or complementary readings on the topic might be required.