Why are the works of female philosophers not recognized as much as men's works, even when they have been influential??
E.g.
>Anne Conway
English philosopher whose work, in the tradition of the Cambridge Platonists, was an influence on Gottfried Leibniz. Conway's thought is original as it is rationalist philosophy, with hallmarks of gynocentric concerns and patterns, and in that sense it was unique among seventeenth-century systems.[1]
>Damaris Cudworth Masham
English theological writer and advocate for women's education who is characterized as a proto-feminist. She overcame some weakness of eyesight and lack of access to formal higher education to win high regard among eminent thinkers of her time. With an extensive correspondence, she published two works, A Discourse Concerning the Love of God (1696) and Thoughts in reference to a Vertuous or Christian Life (1705). She is particularly noted for her long, mutually-influential friendship with the philosopher John Locke.
>Christine of Pizan
Her early and later allegorical and didactic treatises reflect both autobiographical information about her life and views and also her own individualized and humanist approach to the scholastic learned tradition of mythology, legend, and history she inherited from clerical scholars and to the genres and courtly or scholastic subjects of contemporary French and Italian poets she admired. Supported and encouraged by important royal French and English patrons, she influenced 15th-century English poetry. Her success stems from a wide range of innovative writing and rhetorical techniques that critically challenged renowned writers such as Jean de Meun, author of the Romance of the Rose, which she criticized as immoral.
>Elisabeth of the Palatinate
She influenced many key figures and philosophers, most notably René Descartes. She is most famous for questioning Descartes' idea of Dualism, or the mind being separate from the body, in addition to questioning his theories regarding communication between the mind and body. The written correspondence of Descartes and Elisabeth is regarded as an important philosophical document, giving insight into the theoretical debates of the 17th century.
Being influential doesn't automatically mean being good.
I've read several non-fiction books written by women, like history and biology, but philosophy is hardly my thing. I tried Mary Midgley, but haven't finished that and might never do. Will take a look these, thanks for sharing them.
>>9860832
Because they are in reality neither influential nor important. Those female philosophers and theologians that actually are important and influential are widely read- Catharine of Sienna, Teresa of Avila, G. E. M. Amscombe, Edith Stein, Simone Weil get plenty of recognition.
>>9860832
literally "who?" the post
>>9860832
The patriarchy is a conspiracy theory
>>9860930
Nobody mentioned the patriarchy
>>9860832
Because their influence is virtually null compared to the influence of male philosophers, and the reason for this is because men have had the greater knack for philosophy so far.
>>9860832
>even when they have been influential