This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Sophivorus(talk | contribs) at 20:12, 21 January 2022(Remove deprecated test case). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.Revision as of 20:12, 21 January 2022 by Sophivorus(talk | contribs)(Remove deprecated test case)
New knowledge in science is advanced by research from scientists who are motivated by curiosity about the world and a desire to solve problems.[29][30] Contemporary scientific research is highly collaborative and is usually done by teams in academic and research institutions,[31] government agencies,[19] and companies.[32] The practical impact of their work has led to the emergence of science policies that seek to influence the scientific enterprise by prioritising the ethical and moral development of commercial products, armaments, health care, public infrastructure, and environmental protection.
^Heilbron, J. L.; et al. (2003). "Preface". The Oxford Companion to the History of Modern Science. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. vii–x. ISBN978-0-19-511229-0. ...modern science is a discovery as well as an invention. It was a discovery that nature generally acts regularly enough to be described by laws and even by mathematics; and required invention to devise the techniques, abstractions, apparatus, and organization for exhibiting the regularities and securing their law-like descriptions.
^Colander, David C.; Hunt, Elgin F. (2019). "Social science and its methods". Social Science: An Introduction to the Study of Society (17th ed.). New York: Routledge. pp. 1–22.
^Nisbet, Robert A.; Greenfeld, Liah (16 October 2020). "Social Science". Encyclopædia Britannica. Archived from the original on 2 February 2022. Retrieved 9 May 2021.
^Bunge, Mario (1998). "The Scientific Approach". Philosophy of Science: Volume 1, From Problem to Theory. Vol. 1 (revised ed.). New York: Routledge. pp. 3–50. ISBN978-0-7658-0413-6.
^Fetzer, James H. (2013). "Computer reliability and public policy: Limits of knowledge of computer-based systems". Computers and Cognition: Why Minds are not Machines. Newcastle, United Kingdom: Kluwer. pp. 271–308. ISBN978-1-4438-1946-6.
^Nickles, Thomas (2013). "The Problem of Demarcation". Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. The University of Chicago Press. p. 104.
^Lindberg, David C. (2007). The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. ISBN978-0226482057.
^Grant, Edward (2007). "Ancient Egypt to Plato". A History of Natural Philosophy: From the Ancient World to the Nineteenth Century. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 1–26. ISBN978-0-521-68957-1.
^Keay, John (2000). India: A history. Atlantic Monthly Press. p. 132. ISBN978-0-87113-800-2. The great era of all that is deemed classical in Indian literature, art and science was now dawning. It was this crescendo of creativity and scholarship, as much as ... political achievements of the Guptas, which would make their age so golden.
^ abLindberg, David C. (2007). "Islamic science". The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 163–192. ISBN978-0-226-48205-7.
^Lindberg, David C. (2007). "The revival of learning in the West". The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 193–224. ISBN978-0-226-48205-7.
^Lindberg, David C. (2007). "The recovery and assimilation of Greek and Islamic science". The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 225–253. ISBN978-0-226-48205-7.
^Sease, Virginia; Schmidt-Brabant, Manfrid. Thinkers, Saints, Heretics: Spiritual Paths of the Middle Ages. 2007. Pages 80–81Archived 27 August 2024 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 6 October 2023
^Principe, Lawrence M. (2011). "Introduction". Scientific Revolution: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 1–3. ISBN978-0-19-956741-6.
^Lindberg, David C. (2007). "The legacy of ancient and medieval science". The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 357–368. ISBN978-0-226-48205-7.
^Cahan, David, ed. (2003). From Natural Philosophy to the Sciences: Writing the History of Nineteenth-Century Science. University of Chicago Press. ISBN978-0-226-08928-7.
^Lightman, Bernard (2011). "13. Science and the Public". In Shank, Michael; Numbers, Ronald; Harrison, Peter (eds.). Wrestling with Nature: From Omens to Science. University of Chicago Press. p. 367. ISBN978-0-226-31783-0.
^Harrison, Peter (2015). The Territories of Science and Religion. University of Chicago Press. pp. 164–165. ISBN978-0-226-18451-7. The changing character of those engaged in scientific endeavors was matched by a new nomenclature for their endeavors. The most conspicuous marker of this change was the replacement of "natural philosophy" by "natural science". In 1800 few had spoken of the "natural sciences" but by 1880 this expression had overtaken the traditional label "natural philosophy". The persistence of "natural philosophy" in the twentieth century is owing largely to historical references to a past practice (see figure 11). As should now be apparent, this was not simply the substitution of one term by another, but involved the jettisoning of a range of personal qualities relating to the conduct of philosophy and the living of the philosophical life.
The virus was confirmed to have reached France on 24 January 2020, when the first COVID-19 case in both Europe and France was identified in Bordeaux. The first five confirmed cases were all individuals who had recently arrived from China.[2][3] A Chinese tourist who was admitted to hospital in Paris on 28 January 2020, died on 14 February 2020, becoming the first known COVID-19 fatality outside Asia as well as the first in France.[4][5][6][7] A key event in the spread of the disease across metropolitan France as well as its overseas territories was the annual assembly of the Christian Open Door Church between 17 and 24 February 2020 in Mulhouse which was attended by about 2,500 people, at least half of whom are believed to have contracted the virus.[8][9] On 4 May 2020, retroactive testing of samples in one French hospital showed that a patient was probably already infected with the virus on 27 December 2019, almost a month before the first officially confirmed case.[10][11]
The first lockdown period began on 17 March 2020 and ended on 11 May 2020.[12] On 2 May 2020, Health Minister Olivier Véran announced that the government would seek to extend the health emergency period until 24 July 2020.[13] Several mayors opposed the 11 May 2020 lifting of the lockdown, which had been announced by the president a few weeks earlier in a televised address to the nation,[12] saying it was premature. Véran's bill was discussed in Senate on 4 May 2020.[14]
From August 2020, there was an increase in the rate of infection and on 10 October 2020, France set a record number of new infections in a 24-hour period in Europe with 26,896 recorded. The increase caused France to enter a second nationwide lockdown on 28 October 2020. On 15 October 2020, police raided the homes and offices of key government officials, including Véran and Philippe, in a criminal negligence probe opened by the Cour de Justice de la République.[15] According to a team of French epidemiologists, under 5% of the total population of France, or around 2.8 million people, may have been infected with COVID-19. This was believed to have been nearly twice as high in the Île-de-France and Alsaceregions.[16]
On 31 March 2021, Macron announced a third national lockdown which commenced on 3 April 2021 and which was mandated for all of April 2021; measures included the closure of non-essential shops, the suspension of school attendance, a ban on domestic travel and a nationwide curfew from 7pm-6am.
In February 2022, it was reported that no tests are required to enter the country, and children under the age of 12 are free from vaccination requirements.[17]
New knowledge in science is advanced by research from scientists who are motivated by curiosity about the world and a desire to solve problems.[29][30] Contemporary scientific research is highly collaborative and is usually done by teams in academic and research institutions,[31] government agencies,[19] and companies.[32] The practical impact of their work has led to the emergence of science policies that seek to influence the scientific enterprise by prioritising the ethical and moral development of commercial products, armaments, health care, public infrastructure, and environmental protection.
^Heilbron, J. L.; et al. (2003). "Preface". The Oxford Companion to the History of Modern Science. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. vii–x. ISBN978-0-19-511229-0. ...modern science is a discovery as well as an invention. It was a discovery that nature generally acts regularly enough to be described by laws and even by mathematics; and required invention to devise the techniques, abstractions, apparatus, and organization for exhibiting the regularities and securing their law-like descriptions.
^Colander, David C.; Hunt, Elgin F. (2019). "Social science and its methods". Social Science: An Introduction to the Study of Society (17th ed.). New York: Routledge. pp. 1–22.
^Nisbet, Robert A.; Greenfeld, Liah (16 October 2020). "Social Science". Encyclopædia Britannica. Archived from the original on 2 February 2022. Retrieved 9 May 2021.
^Bunge, Mario (1998). "The Scientific Approach". Philosophy of Science: Volume 1, From Problem to Theory. Vol. 1 (revised ed.). New York: Routledge. pp. 3–50. ISBN978-0-7658-0413-6.
^Fetzer, James H. (2013). "Computer reliability and public policy: Limits of knowledge of computer-based systems". Computers and Cognition: Why Minds are not Machines. Newcastle, United Kingdom: Kluwer. pp. 271–308. ISBN978-1-4438-1946-6.
^Nickles, Thomas (2013). "The Problem of Demarcation". Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. The University of Chicago Press. p. 104.
^Lindberg, David C. (2007). The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. ISBN978-0226482057.
^Grant, Edward (2007). "Ancient Egypt to Plato". A History of Natural Philosophy: From the Ancient World to the Nineteenth Century. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 1–26. ISBN978-0-521-68957-1.
^Keay, John (2000). India: A history. Atlantic Monthly Press. p. 132. ISBN978-0-87113-800-2. The great era of all that is deemed classical in Indian literature, art and science was now dawning. It was this crescendo of creativity and scholarship, as much as ... political achievements of the Guptas, which would make their age so golden.
^ abLindberg, David C. (2007). "Islamic science". The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 163–192. ISBN978-0-226-48205-7.
^Lindberg, David C. (2007). "The revival of learning in the West". The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 193–224. ISBN978-0-226-48205-7.
^Lindberg, David C. (2007). "The recovery and assimilation of Greek and Islamic science". The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 225–253. ISBN978-0-226-48205-7.
^Sease, Virginia; Schmidt-Brabant, Manfrid. Thinkers, Saints, Heretics: Spiritual Paths of the Middle Ages. 2007. Pages 80–81Archived 27 August 2024 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 6 October 2023
^Principe, Lawrence M. (2011). "Introduction". Scientific Revolution: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 1–3. ISBN978-0-19-956741-6.
^Lindberg, David C. (2007). "The legacy of ancient and medieval science". The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 357–368. ISBN978-0-226-48205-7.
^Cahan, David, ed. (2003). From Natural Philosophy to the Sciences: Writing the History of Nineteenth-Century Science. University of Chicago Press. ISBN978-0-226-08928-7.
^Lightman, Bernard (2011). "13. Science and the Public". In Shank, Michael; Numbers, Ronald; Harrison, Peter (eds.). Wrestling with Nature: From Omens to Science. University of Chicago Press. p. 367. ISBN978-0-226-31783-0.
^Harrison, Peter (2015). The Territories of Science and Religion. University of Chicago Press. pp. 164–165. ISBN978-0-226-18451-7. The changing character of those engaged in scientific endeavors was matched by a new nomenclature for their endeavors. The most conspicuous marker of this change was the replacement of "natural philosophy" by "natural science". In 1800 few had spoken of the "natural sciences" but by 1880 this expression had overtaken the traditional label "natural philosophy". The persistence of "natural philosophy" in the twentieth century is owing largely to historical references to a past practice (see figure 11). As should now be apparent, this was not simply the substitution of one term by another, but involved the jettisoning of a range of personal qualities relating to the conduct of philosophy and the living of the philosophical life.
The recovery and assimilation of Greek works and Islamic inquiries into Western Europe from the 10th to 13th centuries revived natural philosophy, which was later transformed by the Scientific Revolution that began in the 16th century as new ideas and discoveries departed from previous Greek conceptions and traditions. The scientific method soon played a greater role in knowledge creation and in the 19th century many of the institutional and professional features of science began to take shape, along with the changing of "natural philosophy" to "natural science".
New knowledge in science is advanced by research from scientists who are motivated by curiosity about the world and a desire to solve problems. Contemporary scientific research is highly collaborative and is usually done by teams in academic and research institutions, government agencies, and companies. The practical impact of their work has led to the emergence of science policies that seek to influence the scientific enterprise by prioritising the ethical and moral development of commercial products, armaments, health care, public infrastructure, and environmental protection.
New knowledge in science is advanced by research from scientists who are motivated by curiosity about the world and a desire to solve problems.[29][30] Contemporary scientific research is highly collaborative and is usually done by teams in academic and research institutions,[31] government agencies,[19] and companies.[32] The practical impact of their work has led to the emergence of science policies that seek to influence the scientific enterprise by prioritising the ethical and moral development of commercial products, armaments, health care, public infrastructure, and environmental protection.
^Heilbron, J. L.; et al. (2003). "Preface". The Oxford Companion to the History of Modern Science. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. vii–x. ISBN978-0-19-511229-0. ...modern science is a discovery as well as an invention. It was a discovery that nature generally acts regularly enough to be described by laws and even by mathematics; and required invention to devise the techniques, abstractions, apparatus, and organization for exhibiting the regularities and securing their law-like descriptions.
^Colander, David C.; Hunt, Elgin F. (2019). "Social science and its methods". Social Science: An Introduction to the Study of Society (17th ed.). New York: Routledge. pp. 1–22.
^Nisbet, Robert A.; Greenfeld, Liah (16 October 2020). "Social Science". Encyclopædia Britannica. Archived from the original on 2 February 2022. Retrieved 9 May 2021.
^Bunge, Mario (1998). "The Scientific Approach". Philosophy of Science: Volume 1, From Problem to Theory. Vol. 1 (revised ed.). New York: Routledge. pp. 3–50. ISBN978-0-7658-0413-6.
^Fetzer, James H. (2013). "Computer reliability and public policy: Limits of knowledge of computer-based systems". Computers and Cognition: Why Minds are not Machines. Newcastle, United Kingdom: Kluwer. pp. 271–308. ISBN978-1-4438-1946-6.
^Nickles, Thomas (2013). "The Problem of Demarcation". Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. The University of Chicago Press. p. 104.
^Lindberg, David C. (2007). The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. ISBN978-0226482057.
^Grant, Edward (2007). "Ancient Egypt to Plato". A History of Natural Philosophy: From the Ancient World to the Nineteenth Century. New York: Cambridge University Press. pp. 1–26. ISBN978-0-521-68957-1.
^Keay, John (2000). India: A history. Atlantic Monthly Press. p. 132. ISBN978-0-87113-800-2. The great era of all that is deemed classical in Indian literature, art and science was now dawning. It was this crescendo of creativity and scholarship, as much as ... political achievements of the Guptas, which would make their age so golden.
^ abLindberg, David C. (2007). "Islamic science". The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 163–192. ISBN978-0-226-48205-7.
^Lindberg, David C. (2007). "The revival of learning in the West". The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 193–224. ISBN978-0-226-48205-7.
^Lindberg, David C. (2007). "The recovery and assimilation of Greek and Islamic science". The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 225–253. ISBN978-0-226-48205-7.
^Sease, Virginia; Schmidt-Brabant, Manfrid. Thinkers, Saints, Heretics: Spiritual Paths of the Middle Ages. 2007. Pages 80–81Archived 27 August 2024 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 6 October 2023
^Principe, Lawrence M. (2011). "Introduction". Scientific Revolution: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 1–3. ISBN978-0-19-956741-6.
^Lindberg, David C. (2007). "The legacy of ancient and medieval science". The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 357–368. ISBN978-0-226-48205-7.
^Cahan, David, ed. (2003). From Natural Philosophy to the Sciences: Writing the History of Nineteenth-Century Science. University of Chicago Press. ISBN978-0-226-08928-7.
^Lightman, Bernard (2011). "13. Science and the Public". In Shank, Michael; Numbers, Ronald; Harrison, Peter (eds.). Wrestling with Nature: From Omens to Science. University of Chicago Press. p. 367. ISBN978-0-226-31783-0.
^Harrison, Peter (2015). The Territories of Science and Religion. University of Chicago Press. pp. 164–165. ISBN978-0-226-18451-7. The changing character of those engaged in scientific endeavors was matched by a new nomenclature for their endeavors. The most conspicuous marker of this change was the replacement of "natural philosophy" by "natural science". In 1800 few had spoken of the "natural sciences" but by 1880 this expression had overtaken the traditional label "natural philosophy". The persistence of "natural philosophy" in the twentieth century is owing largely to historical references to a past practice (see figure 11). As should now be apparent, this was not simply the substitution of one term by another, but involved the jettisoning of a range of personal qualities relating to the conduct of philosophy and the living of the philosophical life.
Despite women participating in philosophy throughout history, there exists a gender imbalance in academic philosophy. This can be attributed to implicit biases against women. Women have had to overcome workplace obstacles like sexual harassment. Racial and ethnic minorities are underrepresented in the field of philosophy as well. Minorities and Philosophy (MAP), the American Philosophical Association, and the Society for Women in Philosophy are all organizations trying to fix the gender imbalance in academic philosophy.
In the early 1800s, some colleges and universities in the UK and US began admitting women, producing more female academics. Nevertheless, U.S. Department of Education reports from the 1990s indicate that few women ended up in philosophy, and that philosophy is one of the least gender-proportionate fields in the humanities.[27] Women make up as little as 17% of philosophy faculty in some studies.[28] In 2014, Inside Higher Education described the philosophy "...discipline’s own long history of misogyny and sexual harassment" of women students and professors.[29]Jennifer Saul, a professor of philosophy at the University of Sheffield, stated in 2015 that women are "...leaving philosophy after being harassed, assaulted, or retaliated against."[30]
In the early 1990s, the Canadian Philosophical Association claimed that there is gender imbalance and gender bias in the academic field of philosophy.[31] In June 2013, a US sociology professor stated that "out of all recent citations in four prestigious philosophy journals, female authors comprise just 3.6 percent of the total." The editors of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy have raised concerns about the underrepresentation of women philosophers, and they require editors and writers to ensure they represent the contributions of women philosophers.[31] According to Eugene Sun Park, "[p]hilosophy is predominantly white and predominantly male. This homogeneity exists in almost all aspects and at all levels of the discipline."[25] Susan Price argues that the philosophical "...canon remains dominated by white males—the discipline that...still hews to the myth that genius is tied to gender."[32] According to Saul, philosophy, the oldest of the humanities, is also the malest (and the whitest). While other areas of the humanities are at or near gender parity, philosophy is actually more overwhelmingly male than even mathematics."[33]
^Heilbron, J. L.; et al. (2003). "Preface". The Oxford Companion to the History of Modern Science. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. vii–x. ISBN978-0-19-511229-0. ...modern science is a discovery as well as an invention. It was a discovery that nature generally acts regularly enough to be described by laws and even by mathematics; and required invention to devise the techniques, abstractions, apparatus, and organization for exhibiting the regularities and securing their law-like descriptions.
^Colander, David C.; Hunt, Elgin F. (2019). "Social science and its methods". Social Science: An Introduction to the Study of Society (17th ed.). New York: Routledge. pp. 1–22.
^Nisbet, Robert A.; Greenfeld, Liah (16 October 2020). "Social Science". Encyclopædia Britannica. Archived from the original on 2 February 2022. Retrieved 9 May 2021.
^Bunge, Mario (1998). "The Scientific Approach". Philosophy of Science: Volume 1, From Problem to Theory. Vol. 1 (revised ed.). New York: Routledge. pp. 3–50. ISBN978-0-7658-0413-6.
^Fetzer, James H. (2013). "Computer reliability and public policy: Limits of knowledge of computer-based systems". Computers and Cognition: Why Minds are not Machines. Newcastle, United Kingdom: Kluwer. pp. 271–308. ISBN978-1-4438-1946-6.
^Nickles, Thomas (2013). "The Problem of Demarcation". Philosophy of Pseudoscience: Reconsidering the Demarcation Problem. The University of Chicago Press. p. 104.
^Lindberg, David C. (2007). "The revival of learning in the West". The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 193–224. ISBN978-0-226-48205-7.
^Lindberg, David C. (2007). "The recovery and assimilation of Greek and Islamic science". The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 225–253. ISBN978-0-226-48205-7.
^Sease, Virginia; Schmidt-Brabant, Manfrid. Thinkers, Saints, Heretics: Spiritual Paths of the Middle Ages. 2007. Pages 80–81Archived 27 August 2024 at the Wayback Machine. Retrieved 6 October 2023
^Principe, Lawrence M. (2011). "Introduction". Scientific Revolution: A Very Short Introduction. New York: Oxford University Press. pp. 1–3. ISBN978-0-19-956741-6.
^Lindberg, David C. (2007). "The legacy of ancient and medieval science". The beginnings of Western science: the European Scientific tradition in philosophical, religious, and institutional context (2nd ed.). University of Chicago Press. pp. 357–368. ISBN978-0-226-48205-7.
^Cahan, David, ed. (2003). From Natural Philosophy to the Sciences: Writing the History of Nineteenth-Century Science. University of Chicago Press. ISBN978-0-226-08928-7.
^Lightman, Bernard (2011). "13. Science and the Public". In Shank, Michael; Numbers, Ronald; Harrison, Peter (eds.). Wrestling with Nature: From Omens to Science. University of Chicago Press. p. 367. ISBN978-0-226-31783-0.
^Harrison, Peter (2015). The Territories of Science and Religion. University of Chicago Press. pp. 164–165. ISBN978-0-226-18451-7. The changing character of those engaged in scientific endeavors was matched by a new nomenclature for their endeavors. The most conspicuous marker of this change was the replacement of "natural philosophy" by "natural science". In 1800 few had spoken of the "natural sciences" but by 1880 this expression had overtaken the traditional label "natural philosophy". The persistence of "natural philosophy" in the twentieth century is owing largely to historical references to a past practice (see figure 11). As should now be apparent, this was not simply the substitution of one term by another, but involved the jettisoning of a range of personal qualities relating to the conduct of philosophy and the living of the philosophical life.
^Duran, Jane. Eight women philosophers: theory, politics, and feminism. University of Illinois Press, 2005.
^Haldane, John (June 2000). "In Memoriam: G. E. M. Anscombe (1919–2001)". The Review of Metaphysics. 53 (4): 1019–1021. JSTOR20131480.
^"Salary, Promotion, and Tenure Status of Minority and Women Faculty in U.S. Colleges and Universities."National Center for Education Statistics, Statistical Analysis Report, March 2000; U.S. Department of Education, Office of Education Research and Improvement, Report # NCES 2000–173; 1993 National Study of Postsecondary Faculty (NSOPF:93). See also "Characteristics and Attitudes of Instructional Faculty and Staff in the Humanities." National Center For Education Statistics, E.D. Tabs, July 1997. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Education Research and Improvement, Report # NCES 97-973;1993 National Study of Postsecondary Faculty (NSOPF-93).
^U.S. Department of Education statistics in above-cited reports seem to put the number closer to 17%, but these numbers are based on data from the mid-1990s. Margaret Urban Walker's more recent article (2005) discusses the data problem and describes more recent estimates as an "(optimistically projected) 25–30 percent."
In February 2019, the Republican National Committee voted to provide undivided support to Trump.[1][2] Several states canceled their primaries and caucuses.[3] Other states were encouraged to use "winner-takes-all" or "winner-takes-most" systems to award delegates instead of using proportional allocation.[4][5]
Trump became the presumptive Republican presidential nominee on March 17, 2020, after securing a majority of pledged delegates.[6] Donald Trump received over 18 million votes in the Republican primary, the most ever for an incumbent president in a primary as well as the most for any Republican in a presidential primary.[citation needed]
Despite women participating in philosophy throughout history, there exists a gender imbalance in academic philosophy. This can be attributed to implicit biases against women. Women have had to overcome workplace obstacles like sexual harassment. Racial and ethnic minorities are underrepresented in the field of philosophy as well. Minorities and Philosophy (MAP), the American Philosophical Association, and the Society for Women in Philosophy are all organizations trying to fix the gender imbalance in academic philosophy.
In the early 1800s, some colleges and universities in the UK and US began admitting women, producing more female academics. Nevertheless, U.S. Department of Education reports from the 1990s indicate that few women ended up in philosophy, and that philosophy is one of the least gender-proportionate fields in the humanities.[4] Women make up as little as 17% of philosophy faculty in some studies.[5] In 2014, Inside Higher Education described the philosophy "...discipline’s own long history of misogyny and sexual harassment" of women students and professors.[6]Jennifer Saul, a professor of philosophy at the University of Sheffield, stated in 2015 that women are "...leaving philosophy after being harassed, assaulted, or retaliated against."[7]
In the early 1990s, the Canadian Philosophical Association claimed that there is gender imbalance and gender bias in the academic field of philosophy.[8] In June 2013, a US sociology professor stated that "out of all recent citations in four prestigious philosophy journals, female authors comprise just 3.6 percent of the total." The editors of the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy have raised concerns about the underrepresentation of women philosophers, and they require editors and writers to ensure they represent the contributions of women philosophers.[8] According to Eugene Sun Park, "[p]hilosophy is predominantly white and predominantly male. This homogeneity exists in almost all aspects and at all levels of the discipline."[2] Susan Price argues that the philosophical "...canon remains dominated by white males—the discipline that...still hews to the myth that genius is tied to gender."[9] According to Saul, philosophy, the oldest of the humanities, is also the malest (and the whitest). While other areas of the humanities are at or near gender parity, philosophy is actually more overwhelmingly male than even mathematics."[10]
Sources
^Duran, Jane. Eight women philosophers: theory, politics, and feminism. University of Illinois Press, 2005.
^Haldane, John (June 2000). "In Memoriam: G. E. M. Anscombe (1919–2001)". The Review of Metaphysics. 53 (4): 1019–1021. JSTOR20131480.
^"Salary, Promotion, and Tenure Status of Minority and Women Faculty in U.S. Colleges and Universities."National Center for Education Statistics, Statistical Analysis Report, March 2000; U.S. Department of Education, Office of Education Research and Improvement, Report # NCES 2000–173; 1993 National Study of Postsecondary Faculty (NSOPF:93). See also "Characteristics and Attitudes of Instructional Faculty and Staff in the Humanities." National Center For Education Statistics, E.D. Tabs, July 1997. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Education Research and Improvement, Report # NCES 97-973;1993 National Study of Postsecondary Faculty (NSOPF-93).
^U.S. Department of Education statistics in above-cited reports seem to put the number closer to 17%, but these numbers are based on data from the mid-1990s. Margaret Urban Walker's more recent article (2005) discusses the data problem and describes more recent estimates as an "(optimistically projected) 25–30 percent."