5 ms·

The irony: a page about philosophy displaying unabashed human subjectivity. Feminist philosophy has one entry, wonder why

afogarty 13y ago
Wikipedia's philosophy articles are notoriously bad.
jessriedel 13y ago
You think there is a second article on feminist philosophy that is more notable than the average article on this short list?
- steveklabnik 13y ago
  Yes, "Feminism is for everybody" and/or "Gender Trouble" are just as, if not more, notable than "The Second Sex." Or maybe some of the earliest publications, like 'A Vindication of the Rights of Woman.' Regardless of the details, there are certainly more than one notable work inside of feminism.
- alex-g 13y ago
  "A Vindication of the Rights of Women" by Mary Wollstonecraft is already listed under "modern philosophy", as is "The Subjection of Women" by Mill, and Thomson's "A Defense of Abortion" is under "bioethics". I would think that such works as "A Cyborg Manifesto" by Donna Haraway, "Anarchism" by Emma Goldman, or "Gyn/Ecology" by Mary Daly are at least as worthy of being listed here as "The Book of Five Rings" or Russell's "The Problems of Philosophy".
  - jessriedel 13y ago
    > ...are at least as worthy of being listed here as "The Book of Five Rings" or Russell's "The Problems of Philosophy". I said "average article" precisely because I didn't want people to just cherry pick a weak entry here and there. Any list of the top 100 whatever will be open to dispute. Saying "I think X was unfairly excluded because it's clearly more important than entry 97" is not good evidence of bias. "A defense of abortion" is moral philosophy. If you classify it as feminism, the term is overly broad (and, of course, only weakens the case for bias).
nick_urban 13y ago
Notably empty category: Business ethics.
derleth 13y ago
Find some reliable sources and fix it, if it bothers you.
- brownbat 13y ago
  It's gotten harder to do so over the years. I used to lodge several edits, people would build on what was written. Now it seems like everything gets an automatic revert. I'd dismiss it as the mediocre quality of my contributions, but I don't think I'm alone: > "Wikipedia has changed from the encyclopedia that anyone can edit to the encyclopedia that anyone who understands the norms, socializes himself or herself, dodges the impersonal wall of semi-automated rejection, and still wants to voluntarily contribute his or her time and energy can edit," Halfaker said. http://www1.umn.edu/news/news-releases/2013/UR_CONTENT_428365.html http://www1.umn.edu/news/news-releases/2013/UR_CONTENT_42836...
dfc 13y ago
What is "the irony"?

afogarty 13y ago

Wikipedia's philosophy articles are notoriously bad.

jessriedel 13y ago

You think there is a second article on feminist philosophy that is more notable than the average article on this short list?

steveklabnik 13y ago
Yes, "Feminism is for everybody" and/or "Gender Trouble" are just as, if not more, notable than "The Second Sex." Or maybe some of the earliest publications, like 'A Vindication of the Rights of Woman.' Regardless of the details, there are certainly more than one notable work inside of feminism.
alex-g 13y ago
"A Vindication of the Rights of Women" by Mary Wollstonecraft is already listed under "modern philosophy", as is "The Subjection of Women" by Mill, and Thomson's "A Defense of Abortion" is under "bioethics". I would think that such works as "A Cyborg Manifesto" by Donna Haraway, "Anarchism" by Emma Goldman, or "Gyn/Ecology" by Mary Daly are at least as worthy of being listed here as "The Book of Five Rings" or Russell's "The Problems of Philosophy".
- jessriedel 13y ago
  > ...are at least as worthy of being listed here as "The Book of Five Rings" or Russell's "The Problems of Philosophy". I said "average article" precisely because I didn't want people to just cherry pick a weak entry here and there. Any list of the top 100 whatever will be open to dispute. Saying "I think X was unfairly excluded because it's clearly more important than entry 97" is not good evidence of bias. "A defense of abortion" is moral philosophy. If you classify it as feminism, the term is overly broad (and, of course, only weakens the case for bias).

nick_urban 13y ago

Notably empty category: Business ethics.

derleth 13y ago

Find some reliable sources and fix it, if it bothers you.

brownbat 13y ago
It's gotten harder to do so over the years. I used to lodge several edits, people would build on what was written. Now it seems like everything gets an automatic revert. I'd dismiss it as the mediocre quality of my contributions, but I don't think I'm alone: > "Wikipedia has changed from the encyclopedia that anyone can edit to the encyclopedia that anyone who understands the norms, socializes himself or herself, dodges the impersonal wall of semi-automated rejection, and still wants to voluntarily contribute his or her time and energy can edit," Halfaker said. http://www1.umn.edu/news/news-releases/2013/UR_CONTENT_428365.html http://www1.umn.edu/news/news-releases/2013/UR_CONTENT_42836...

dfc 13y ago

What is "the irony"?