Tamar Gendler and Stephen Stich

Tamar Gendler (left) and Stephen Stich (right) on gender and philosophical intuition.

Empirical evidence collected by Stich and Buckwalter suggests that “standard” intuitions about philosophical thought experiments (e.g. Gettier cases) are more common among men than women. Stich and Gendler examine the merits of this evidence. They consider what might explain gendered differences in intuitions, and whether such differences can help to explain why women are underrepresented in professional philosophy. They also discuss alternative explanations for the gender gap, including the effects of sexism and the shortage of female professors and graduate students to serve as role models for female undergraduates. Finally, they ask why a gender gap has been a larger problem in philosophy than other fields.

Related works

by Gendler:
Philosophical Thought Experiments, Intuitions, and Cognitive Equilibrium” (2009)
Alief in Action (and Reaction)” (2008)
with John Hawthorne: “The Real Guide to Fake Barns: A Catalogue of Gifts for Your Epistemic Enemies” (2005)

by Stich:
with Wesley Buckwalter: “Gender and Philosophical Intuition” (2010)
with John Doris: “As a Matter of Fact: Empirical Perspectives on Ethics” (2005)
with Jonathan Weinberg and Shaun Nichols: “Normativity and Epistemic Intuitions” (2001)

See also:
What Is It Like to Be a Woman In Philosophy?


1 Comment

Filed under Methodology, The Profession, x-phi

One Response to Tamar Gendler and Stephen Stich

  1. “one special thing about philosophy is that students are encountering it for the first time in university”: it’s not true everywhere. In Québec and in France, philosophy is obligatory in standard pre-university curricula. I can’t say about precise data, but looking at some enrollment data the faculty gave us, which are not as fine-grained as yours (divided by cycles), we get similar trends.