A Response to Hubbard’s essay Science, Facts, and Feminism :: Hubbard Scientific Men Females Essays

A Response to Hubbards essay Science, Facts, and FeminismIn her essay Science, Facts, and Feminism Ruth Hubbard makes many claims in relating her opinions about the consanguinity between men and women in society as well as the role light plays in this relationship and the balance of power in the world. One of her claims states that the pretense that recognition is objective, a semipolitical and value-neutral is profoundly political because it obscures the political role that science and technology play in underwriting the existing statistical distribution of power in society. In essence, she is saying that it is ridiculous to claim that science is an objective look at the world around us because science is constantly affected by society and the political establishment. I harbour that it is impossible to claim that science is in every way say from politics and power because those types of people who created the political world also created the scientific world to supplement and s upport it. For example, the government, a political and power establishment, created the Manhattan objectify and put a huge amount of funding into a scientific project that produced the atomic bomb.Hubbard disagrees with the idea that science is immune to power and politics. To specify that science is neutral one must assume that the scientist is able to get through himself from the screen out subject and the surroundings and simply observe without affecting the test in any way. In reality this is impossible. The scientist must design the test, do it, and be prepared to fix it if it does not address the problem he has posed. Because human beings are imperfect, the tests are also imperfect. As a result, the culture the scientist reaches is no longer objective, but influenced by the type of results he is expecting.Furthermore, to trust that science is immune to the power establishment, one must assume that it is in no way affected by government or companies with bills to spend . This, like the assumption that science is neutral, is also incorrect. In order for a scientist to be funded in his research, he must submit proposals to those power establishments that permit cash. These powerful companies and governments will only fund those projects they deem important to their interests and goals. In this way, science is extremely political in its effort to obtain money and support because it must please those power establishments who are, by nature, political.