Science ,Technology and Society

Human action can not be represented as simultaneously law like and intentional, and it can not be only explained in terms of lawful relations with genes, settled brain states or environmental contingencies.”Illustrating this Longino discusses a stratey in behavioral endocrinology that uses the liner –hormonal model (LHM:hormone-brain-oranisation –behavior), in which sex differences in a variety of behavior (including performance in some mathematical tests ) are lawfully attributed to differences in brain organization ,which are themselves lawfully attributed differential roles of gonadal hormones in fetal development. ( Lacey :2005)”

Longino argues that it could not be shown that theories developed with liner –hormonal model manifests the cognitive values to a high degree of some relevant domains of phenomena.” They appear to do so in the light of assuming that there are essential brain differences between males and females that account for a great variety of behavioral differences. This assumption is not contained in a theory soundly accepted in accordance with impartiality ,and holding it is explicable only in terms of its being a pre supposition .Accepting theories developed with LHM involve play of value alongside cognitive values rather than prior to their play.In opting for Longino's model of feminist science one identifies human agency as the primary object of inquiry and one is primed to query alleged limits to its possible expansion based on gender, race and other such differences.” ( Lacey :2005)

Thus we find that feminist critics of science like Keller and Longino have criticised the androcentric bias in contemporary biology and social science, though their goal is not to produce a ‘different science,' but a ‘liberated one.