| Author(s) | Cheshire Calhoun |
| Journal | Hypatia |
| Abstract | This essay examines why women are significantly less likely than men to major in philosophy as undergraduates. After reviewing some positives—women taking intro courses at similar rates to men and not dropping the major at higher rates—it considers two hypotheses. The “classroom influences” hypothesis is that something negative happens in intro philosophy courses that deters women from further study. However, evidence does not support women having worse perceptions of fairness, comfort, or adversariality in these courses. The alternative “preuniversity influences” hypothesis is that factors external to philosophy classrooms shape women’s openness to the major. The essay suggests reframing the question to ask why women prefer other areas of study they actually major in. It then recommends examining what generally matters in major choice and what majors women disproportionately select to generate hypotheses for why women expect philosophy to deliver less on those choice factors. This content was generated by artificial intelligence using the text of the original work. |
| Keywords | philosophy major, gender gap, undergraduate education, choice of major This content was generated by artificial intelligence using the text of the original work. |
| Date Published | Spring 2015 |
| Volume | 30 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 475-485 |
| DOI | https://doi.org/10.1111/hypa.12149 |
| URL | https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/hypatia/article/abs/precluded-interests/198C0725594BB3FE118655BEBEB6C9B7 |
| Google Scholar Link | https://scholar.google.ca/scholar?cluster=4958957018879068327&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5 |
| Open Access? | No |
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.