Feminist Theory: A Philosophical Anthology addresses seven philosophically significant questions regarding feminism, its central concepts of sex and gender, and the project of centering women’s experience. Topics include the nature of sexist oppression, the sex/gender distinction, how gender-based norms influence conceptions of rationality, knowledge, and scientific objectivity, feminist ethics, feminst perspectives on self and autonomy, whether there exist distinct feminine moral perspectives, and what would comprise true liberation. Features an introductory overview illustrating the development of feminism as a philosophical movement (...) Contains both classic and contemporary sources of feminist thought, including selections by Mary Wollstonecraft, John Stuart Mill, Simone de Beauvior, Kate Millett, bell hooks, Marilyn Frye, Martha Nussbaum, Louise Antony, Sally Haslanger, Helen Longino, Marilyn Friedman, Catharine MacKinnon, and Drucilla Cornell. (shrink)

What is sexism? What are its underlying causes? What makes it morally wrong? Can whole institutions, practices and policies, contribute to the unjust distribution of benefi ts and burdens? Or does sexism, when it exists, occur on an individual basis? This article analyzes the notion of institutional sexism for its conceptual, causal, and moral character. The author compares the notions that institutional sexism largely pertains to the oppression of women to those which say that it pertains broadly to any unjust (...) treatment on the basis of sex. She examines the historical and cultural sources of sexism. When it exists, do the sources of sexism rest with attitudes of individuals or the very structure of institutions themselves? She shows why individual attitudes themselves are often not the sole sources of sexism, where it exists. Institutional structure can equally contribute to its existence. (shrink)

In this paper we discuss the scientific value of the human genome project. To what extent is the data obtained by sequencing the entire human genome useful in the gene dicovery process? Responding to Alex Rosenberg' skepticism about the value of such data, we maintain that brute sequence data is much more useful than he suggests.