There is psychological evidence that ‘typical’ characteristics can acquire normative status: what is atypical can come to be seen as deviant. I consider two main areas where this idea is relevant to the case of philosophy: first, the professional philosophy seminar or conference talk, where an adversarial, and sometimes downright hostile, atmosphere can come to be regarded as ‘the norm’, so that those who find such an atmosphere alienating are regarded as being too thin-skinned. Second, I discuss thought experiments, where, again, the ‘normal’ response can be taken to be the ‘right’ response, so that students whose own intuitions conflict are, again, regarded as being at fault in some way. In both cases there are at least prima facie reasons to think that women are more likely than men to be the ‘deviants’; but there are also non-gender-based reasons to resist the move from atypicality to deviance.
Keywords
Seminar style, Arguments, Thought experiments, Deviance, Women
Comments are closed, but trackbacks and pingbacks are open.