Sciences of Consent
Abstract
Feminist and Indigenous philosophies of science have much to dialogue about regarding the relationship between science and consent. Some Indigenous scientific traditions emphasize consent as a significant characteristic of empirical inquiry. Consent means that responsibilities are acted out in ways that are accountable to the animacy of diverse beings and entities of the world. Responsibility and consent are significant to the role of science in governance systems, or its governance value. Consent is not a restriction or regulation on science, nor is consent a characteristic that merely increases the objectivity of empirical inquiry. By focusing on Indigenous accounts of knowledge and science, the essay builds concepts for understanding science and consent.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Indigenous knowledge has been deemed as inferior, partial, magical, or supplemental by Western sciences.
“Indigenous knowledge, however, has been deemed as inferior, partial, magical, or, in the best of cases, supplemental by Western sciences (Whyte, 2020).”
From An Inside Sun: Lickanantay Volcanology in the Salar de Atacama (2022) · cites this paper as Whyte, 2020
Cites
8 Decolonizing Methodologies: Research and Indigenous Peoples
Smith, L. T. (2024) · Multilingual Matters eBooks · doi:10.21832/9781800418868-012 · Cited by 9,765 · see citing works
(2007) · Project Muse (Johns Hopkins University) · Cited by 7,214 · see citing works
Reclaiming Indigenous Voice and Vision
Battiste, M. (2007) · University of British Columbia Press eBooks · doi:10.59962/9780774853170 · Cited by 1,427 · see citing works
TallBear, K. (2010) · University of Minnesota Press eBooks · doi:10.5749/9780816685776 · Cited by 1,139 · see citing works
All our relations: native struggles for land and life
(2000) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.37-4085 · Cited by 748 · see citing works
?Strong objectivity?: A response to the new objectivity question
Harding, S. (1995) · Synthese · doi:10.1007/bf01064504 · Cited by 658 · see citing works
Creating Methodological Space: A Literature Review of Kaupapa Maori Research
Pīhama, L., Cram, F., & Walker, S. J. (2021) · Open Collections · doi:10.14288/cjne.v26i1.195910 · Cited by 210 · see citing works
Holistic risk-based environmental decision making: a Native perspective.
Arquette, M., Cole, M., Cook, K., LaFrance, B., Peters, M., Ransom, J., Sargent, E., Smoke, V., & Stairs, A. (2002) · Environmental Health Perspectives · doi:10.1289/ehp.02110s2259 · Cited by 200 · see citing works
Traditional Ecological Knowledge
(2018) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108552998 · Cited by 182 · see citing works
Science as Social Knowledge: Values and Objectivity in Scientific Inquiry
LONGINO, H. E. (2020) · doi:10.2307/j.ctvx5wbfz · Cited by 161 · see citing works
‘Polishing the Kaswentha’: a Haudenosaunee view of environmental cooperation
Ransom, J. W., & Ettenger, K. T. (2001) · Environmental Science & Policy · doi:10.1016/s1462-9011(01)00027-2 · Cited by 58 · see citing works
Persson, P. B., & Persson, A. B. (2018) · Acta Physiologica · doi:10.1111/apha.13173 · Cited by 11 · see citing works
Relationship with Land in Anishinaabeg Womxn’s Historical Research
Sy, W. C. (2018) · University of Illinois Press eBooks · doi:10.5622/illinois/9780252042003.003.0017 · Cited by 2 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
An Inside Sun: Lickanantay Volcanology in the Salar de Atacama
Ramos Chocobar, S., & Tironi, M. (2022) · Frontiers in Earth Science · doi:10.3389/feart.2022.909967 · Cited by 59 · see citing works
- Authors
- Whyte, K.
- Corresponding author
- Whyte, Kyle
- ORCID
- Whyte, Kyle
- Venue
- The Routledge Handbook of Feminist Philosophy of Science
- Publisher
- Routledge
- Published
- 2020-11-30
- Pages
- 117-130
- OpenAlex
- W3113089198
- Cited by
- 11
- References
- 13
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2
- FWCI
- 10.32
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Routledge eBooks (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies
- Social Sciences › Health › Indigenous Health, Education, and Rights
- Social Sciences › Anthropology › Decolonial Thought and Epistemologies
- Keywords
- consent, feminist philosophy of science, animacy, responsibility, accountability, objectivity, science and knowledge
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
