Jessie Boehm

A claim is a statement made to influence others to accept a certain point of view. In her essay "Science, Facts, and Feminism," Ruth Hubbard presents various claims criticizing the way scientific epistemology works as a separate, exclusive entity. Hubbard’s claims suggest that the way society perceives and values science ought to be reevaluated. I agree strongly with two of her claims.

One of these claims states that "this society values mental labor more highly than manual labor" (121). This claim is fairly straightforward in meaning; it says that the Western culture places a higher priority on mental labor than manual labor. In the Western culture, positions which require completion of stringent educational requirements rank higher in status, both in terms of respect and monetary rewards, than those which require physical work.

In America people working in mental occupations are often paid higher salaries than those working in manual positions. The number of letters following one’s name that indicate educational achievement often dictates the amount of respect he or she receives. People sometimes look down upon jobs requiring intense physical labor. The people who see mental labor as superior sometimes cite the fact that anyone could work outside all day in the sun, but it takes an educated professional to work in a laboratory. This outlook exemplifies the value society places on mental work.

While I agree with Hubbard’s claim, it is a bit naïve in assuming that every occupation is either all manual or mental. While most jobs are viewed by society as wholly manual or mental occupations, manual occupations cross over into mental occupations (and vice versa) every day. Farmers, for instance, must have knowledge in the areas of business, biology, and mathematics, to name a few, in order to run a profitable operation. However, most farmers, thought of as "manual" workers, do not attain the same respect as a business person or scientist, "mental" workers.

My personal experiences have demonstrated to me the truth in Hubbard’s claim that society places a higher value on mental work than manual work. I have lived on a farm my entire life, so I feel I am acutely aware of society’s devaluation of manual labor. While most farmers work hours that would breach those of almost any "day job," they are still, on average, paid far less than, for example, an engineer that has set weekday hours and rare weekend work. One would think that farmers’ work would have high priority, because they care for the animals and crops that feed the world. Unfortunately, this isn’t always the case. As an example, one might expect society’s respect to rest on the scientists that researches or formulates improved crops, not the farmer that applies the scientists’ theories and raises the crops. The public’s respect rests with the scientist because society places a higher value on work that appears to be all mind power.

Hubbard’s second claim states that society "downgrades the orally transmitted knowledge and the unpaid observations, experimentation, and teaching that happen in the household" (128). This claim states that just as science and society downgrade manual labor, these two areas do not value that which cannot be taught or learned in a scientific setting, such as the kitchen or garden. Hubbard claims society views the knowledge gained outside a scientific setting as trivial.

I agree with this claim based on personal experience as well. I am a child of a stay-at-home mom. I feel society does not adequately value the contributions a homemaker bestows upon her household. In many situations these mothers take care of the home, children, and daily household chores using "a different brand of botany, chemistry, and hygiene to work in" their "gardens, kitchens, nurseries, and sick rooms" (Hubbard 128). My mother has always encouraged me to work with her to complete various tasks. These experiences perpetually provide me with vital academic and social lessons. Some of these lessons are contained in books, while other are not. The knowledge homemakers gain, apply, and transmit in everyday life is not recognized by society as science. Hubbard states, and I agree, that this knowledge is as legitimate and proficient as science.

To agree with these claims, one might hold some of the following assumptions. For the first claim, one must assume that society places a value on only two kinds of labor: mental and manual. One type is seen as superior in society’s eyes; they can’t hold equal weight. In addition to respect, one must also consider monetary rewards in the value society places on mental work over manual work.

In the second claim, one assumes that wisdom garnered outside a scientific setting is still potent and valuable. One must see experimentation, teaching, and oral transmission as effective ways of producing knowledge. One must assume that the transfer of information, wherever it takes place, is eminent and vital to science and all areas of learning.

I hold the preceding assumptions because I feel that one can gain knowledge from a variety of sources; not all of these sources are scientific or result solely from mental labor. My personal experiences provide the basis for the assumptions I hold. The examples I cited demonstrate the way I feel society places mental work on a higher pedestal than manual labor. They also show how society regards information gained in a household setting as less than scientific. My values may differ from society’s values, but based on my lifestyle thus far, I feel I can make a valid response to Hubbard’s claims.