Talk:Strong objectivity

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Strong objectivity article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Gender studies Low‑importance

This article is part of WikiProject Gender studies. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Wikipedia. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Gender studiesWikipedia:WikiProject Gender studiesTemplate:WikiProject Gender studiesGender studies

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

To-do list:

Here are some tasks awaiting attention:

Assess : see Unassessed Gender studies articles and Unknown-importance Gender studies articles
Cleanup : edit to see
Collaborate : see /Collaboration
Copyedit : edit to see
Deletion sorting : see /Sexuality and gender
Expand : edit to see
Infobox : see Gender studies articles needing infoboxes
Merge : edit to see
Notability : edit to see
NPOV : edit to see
Orphans : Brannon Masculinity Scale · Holy Virility · Media and gender · Michael Kaufman (author) · Women's education in Saudi Arabia
Photo : see Wikipedia requested photographs of gender studies
Split : History of feminism
Stubs : see Gender studies stubs
Translate : see /translation
Update : edit to see
Verify : Riot grrrl
Needs attention : see Gender studies articles needing attention

Feminism Mid‑importance

	Feminism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:52, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Article title misleading

Article ought be titled "Feminist Strong Objectivity" to distinguish its origin in feminist theory. Subject cannot be evaluated without grounding in feminist theory.Voodooengineer (talk) 00:05, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Voodooengineer - Is there a use of the term "strong objectivity" outside of feminist standpoint theory? If not, I see no reason to rename the page. EvergreenFir (talk) 08:18, 28 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Actually yes, Harding's work is often referred to as strong objectivity in conversation with objective science or "view from nowhere" objective standpoint. Although it has feminist origins it stands as a broader critique in science and technology studies — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.241.201.168 (talk) 03:24, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Any reliable sources saying as much would be greatly appreciated. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:26, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Try Cowburn, M., Nelson, P., & Wilson, J. (2000). Assessment of social work students: Standpoint and strong objectivity.Social Work Education 19(6). 627-637. DOI 10.1080/02615470020002344 or Sarah, W. J., & Aaltio-Marjosola, I. (2001). "Strong objectivity and the use of Q-methodology in cross-cultural research: Contextualizing the experience of women managers and their scripts of career. Journal of Management Inquiry, 10(3), 228-248. --68.3.131.104 (talk) 05:02, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your response is confused and confusing because you ignored the context. Since that use of "strong objectivity" still refers to Harding's feminist-based notion, there is no reason to change the title to distinguish it from some other sort of "strong objectivity" ... in fact, if (I plead agnosticism on this claim) it "stands as a broader critique", that's all the more reason not to add "feminist" to the title. Jibal (talk) 19:30, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]