Is R.S. Peters' way of mentioning women in his texts detrimental to philosophy of education? Some considerations and questions

Abstract

Discussion in this article considers the unfortunate way R.S. Peters made mention of women when it was pertinent to his argumentation: portraying them, directly or indirectly, as abuse-able (murderable), deficient, aberrant, clueless and inconstant. It is argued that the high profile and esteem within which Peter's texts are held within philosophy of education might be a problem for it as a scholarly mixed gender community. Three issues are considered in relation to current possible bias caused by Peters' presentation of women in his texts: implicit (unconscious) bias against female philosophers of education; a connection between denigration of women's value by Peters and current low status and marginalisation for alternative (progressive) educational ideas; and the extent to which these matters could be invidiously affecting the development of philosophy of education as scholarship and community.