By Katie Norris
Philosophy: The study of questions, knowledge, reality, and our existence. When we think of philosophy, our mind conjures images of scholarly, passionate Greek men in robes imparting wisdom to those around them at the symposium, telling tales and asking questions that challenge the perception of the other men around them. Or maybe we visualize men in dark silky clothes painted onto a soft velvety background.
They are truly picturesque visions, but why does it feel like there is something missing? Where are the visions of robed women in the gymnasia? Where are the imaginings of women, standing there, imposingly, on an ominously painted canvas, surrounded by their books and academic pursuits? In the annals of philosophy, few women have been able to come to the forefront and make a known impact on this academic study. But why is that? Where are the women?
Throughout history, women of philosophy have been pushed aside and silenced, excluded from places of learning, or forced to teach in schools for women. They have been ridiculed and condescended to, told they were too motherly or unintelligent. They have had their works stolen and gone uncredited, which has greatly impacted not only the validity of philosophical thinking but also the scope of what could have been conceived.
I: The History of The Unworthy
If we go back in history to the Greek era, we find a way of life that made it difficult for women to participate in philosophical thinking. We also see different prominent thinkers whose views on women were less than savory. Some of these thinkers are still taught in high school and college philosophy classes.
In their upbringing, most women in ancient Greek society were educated at home, independent researcher Raquel López tells us. “Relegated to the private sphere, girls’ educations were typically haphazard, often occurring at home, if they occurred at all,” López writes. While the boys were sent for education to be civil servants, women were not considered to be citizens at all. Women were prepared for the life of a homemaker, and many were unable to get the outside education that boys received. (López). Women were also not allowed as guests in centers of thought such as symposiums. The uninvited guest or akletos “was made to feel as welcome as anyone else, provided he [in Classical Greece, dinner guests were always male and almost exclusively drawn from the aristocracy] enlivened the evening for the other guests with his entertaining conversation” (Murcia). If women did come to the symposium, it was as flautists, dancers, and courtesans (Murcia). They were not a part of the discussion.
Some of the more prominent Greek thinkers such as Socrates and Plato could be seen as somewhat feminist for their time. Socrates in Plato’s Symposium spoke of the thinker Diotima and presented her views on love. And yet Socrate’s wife, Xanthippe, was “shut out from the sacred dialogue of the philosophers-excluded even from the deathbed scene—seen only as the nagging wife who distracts the great man from his thought” (Wider). Plato also wrote in Republic, Book 5 (in the voice of Socrates), “Then if we employ women for the same tasks as men, they must also be taught the same things. … Now, we gave the latter musical and physical training. … So, we must also give these two crafts, as well as military training to the women and employ them in the same way.” This seems to be very forward-thinking in terms of women and education, and yet in the same writings he also says, “but in all of them women is inferior to man”. Among the classical thinkers, Aristotle may be the worst in terms of his views on women. He finds women to be inferior to men in many ways. While there are extensive writings by Aristotle on the inferiority of women (including even on childbirth!), they cannot all possibly be covered in one paragraph. To summarize his thoughts this, a passage from his Politics will suffice: “The male is by nature superior and the female inferior; and the one that rules and the other is ruled; this principle of necessity extends to all mankind."
II: Thoughts Neglected
When we look at philosophy in the last few centuries, we still see women neglected, unable to get a proper education, and ridiculed by their male peers. Women in philosophy were given different professional titles and demeaned for their femininity.
In much of the last century or so, women who have tried to enter the space of Philosophy have been denied. Women who wrote of philosophical concepts were not philosophers but ‘novelists’ and ‘theologians’. Women whose philosophical ideas were acknowledged had their thoughts labeled as ‘bad ‘ or ‘derivative’ philosophy (Connell and Janssen-Lauret). Women of the time would often make their ideas ‘softer’ to be more palatable, often crediting and thanking male philosophers, and writing in a “self-deprecatory style." The women of the time wanted to be heard, and the only way they could do so was to appeal to the majority. While this tactic did work in that men of the time would read their writing and would not be offended by their feminine audacity, they were still demeaned for trying to be a part of the discourse. In their article ”'Bad Philosophy' and 'Derivative Philosophy’: Labels that Keep Women out of Canon," classicists S.M. Connell and F. Janssen-Lauret write, “Men are to have a 'freedom from shame and lack of public humiliation'; we see these women philosophers constantly being subjected to this while having to avoid imposing on a male contemporary. A woman 'may be effectively prohibited from competing with him, for or otherwise robbing him of, certain masculine-coded prizes; and he may also be deemed entitled to prevent her from so doing… To the extent to which she tries to or successfully beats the boys at their own game’ she may be held to have cheated, or to have stolen something from him” (Connell and Janssen-Lauret) .
While claiming that these women were “overly motherly” and “unintelligent,” their male contemporaries were also using their ideas without crediting them in their writings. Bertrand Russell, a well-known male philosopher of his time, wrote about the concept of "Sense-reference distinction" and credited Gottlob Frege despite being aware of Constance Jones writing about the topic first, with the same significance on the subject as Frege, essentially contributing to her erasure from mainstream philosophy (Connell and Janssen-Lauret).
III. Philosophy Today
The formal academic field of Philosophy is still very much a boy's club today. While there are women in philosophy making important contributions, the atmosphere can be less than inviting. Women have been left out of philosophy for so long that the opinions of educated white males have become the basis for what is ‘normal’. As women continue their undergraduate studies, their numbers begin to dwindle. Is this because they cannot relate to the subject matter, as they are not the norm and have been systematically erased from mainstream philosophy? Or is it, as British philosopher Helen Beebee argues, the aggressive nature of philosophy in general? Helen submits that “there is a clear distinction between style and content when it comes to philosophical discussions, and that an overly combative seminar style serves no philosophical purpose and may be alienating to (some) women” (Beebee) . While it is a stereotype of women to be meek and less argumentative, Beebee does acknowledge that not all women shy away from argumentative “masculine” environments, but the stereotype being perceived (whether it is true or not) is still harmful to women in philosophy. Women feel like they need to change to fit the ‘norm’ because if they aren’t aggressive or agreeable to the current philosophy, they are judged more harshly. They also feel responsible for "all women" wanting to excel to show that women are just as capable (Beebee). Is it fair, though, that women in philosophy must change? Why are their opinions not considered normative, as much as an educated white male’s opinion?
IV: Impact
Philosophy: The study of questions, knowledge, reality, and our existence. The definition of Philosophy was laid out in the beginning of this article, and it is important to really think about. If Philosophy truly is the study of questions, knowledge, reality and our existence, why, then, do we look at these topics with such a narrow scope? When we want to answer questions about innate knowledge, or our reality, how can we say that we have really taken a thorough look without also considering the experiences of women and other minorities? Beebee continues to expand on her argument mentioned earlier in this way, speaking of intuitions. She mentions that conceptual analysis is often “arrived at from an armchair... stating what, ‘intuitively’, is the right thing to say, and then sitting back and waiting to see whether anyone objects” (Beebee). The result of “actual empirical experiments” shows that there are vast differences between different subpopulations (Beebee)—so why are we taught only the philosophy of one population in Philosophy 101, or high school philosophy classes?
The impact of this exclusion and erasure may possibly be devastating. We will never know what concepts could have been presented if women were allowed to participate in philosophy as equals to men. Women of philosophy “show a concern for understanding the points of view of others and take these into account,” “exhibit some epistemic virtues not shared by [their] male counter parts,” and have shown “philosophical ideas and insights unfamiliar to modern readers” (Connell and Janssen-Lauret)—but instead of being embraced and considered revolutionary advancement in thoughts and concepts, these ideas have been shot down and their authors told they were unintelligent and had "Bad Philosophy." Is it any wonder that fewer women are entering the field of philosophy when none of these philosophical ideas apply to them, and they are not represented in their classes? What would women philosophers in ancient Greece have conceptualized were they given the chance at an education and a space to talk? For example, Diotima is credited with helping Socrates to learn about love—but if one woman could do that, imagine the realm of ideas we could have had if more women had been given that chance.
We cannot fathom to know what we have lost to history's misogynist past (and present). Maybe if women can take back their history—if we can share the thoughts of women who wrote "bad," "derivative," or "deviant" philosophy in introductory classes along with “the greats"—we can not only create a space where women can be more comfortable pursuing philosophical thought, but maybe also honor those women who were lost to time. Maybe also we can expand our methods of thinking not only for women but for men, who have only ever been presented philosophy in a familiar way. And maybe by doing this we can expand our thoughts on questions, knowledge, reality and our existence exponentially.
Works Cited
Beebee, H. (2013). "Women and Deviance in Philosophy." In F. J. Katrina Hutchinson,
Women in Philosophy: What Needs to Change? (pp. 61-80). New York: Oxford Academic.
Retrieved December 2024
Connell, S. M., and Janssen-Lauret, F. (2023). 'Bad philosophy'; and 'derivative
philosophy': Labels that keep women out of the canon. Metaphilosophy, 238-253.
López, R. (2019, August 28). Did sons and daughters get the same education in ancient
Greece? Retrieved from National Geographic.com:
Murcia, F. J. (2017, January/February). Wine, Women, and Wisdom: The Symposia of Ancient
Greece. Retrieved from Nationalgeographic.com:
Wider, K. (1986). "Women Philosophers in the Ancient Greek World: Donning the Mantle." Hypatia, vol 1, No. 1, pp. 21-62.
Katie Norris is a sophomore at CT State Tunxis.
Comments