Abstract

What becomes of objectivity if we reject the realist claim that inquiry uncovers the "true" nature of an independent, antecedent world, or the foundationalist claim that inquiry must adhere to a set of independent rational standards? Clearly we must relinquish the notion that objective truths or objectively valid methods are attainable only by inquirers occupying the epistemologically privileged "Archimedean standpoint." ;If we begin by contending that inquiry and its products are in principle value and emotion laden, context dependent, we must either reject the very possibility of objectivity, or we must retool the concept to reflect inquiry's contextual nature. ;I briefly consider and reject the first alternative--the rejection of objectivity--by examining Paul Feyerabend's position, his epistemological epigram "anything goes," and his free society of inquiry. I then explore in detail two sorts of ways we might reshape the concept of objectivity. ;I consider the empirical naturalist position of John Dewey, and the positions of three feminist epistemologists--Sandra Harding, Alison Jaggar and Evelyn Fox Keller. All of these positions share membership in a family of epistemological programs I label "Coresponsible Options." They subscribe to neither traditional absolutism nor Feyerabend's "anything goes" attitude. They are flexible, interactivist and anti-dualist in nature, and they reserve an important place in inquiry for the role of emotion and value. The term "coresponsible" embodies, among other things, the importance of community and responsibility for inquiry. ;I concentrate on the nature of inquiry-as-activity, an activity that takes place in a world where chance and certainty are inextricably mixed. I also focus on the nature of the inquiry relationship. I consider Jaggar's notion of the standpoint of women, but reject it on the grounds that it inherits the problems of the traditional Archimedean standpoint model, including subject/object dualism. In place of a standpoint, I develop Dewey's, Harding's and Keller's models, in which the inquiry relation is conceived as a form of communication between inquirer and inquired, where both are members of the "inquiry community." I ultimately suggest the model of friendship for doing responsible inquiry to produce reliable, useful results