My notes from the class discussion on Longino:

Knowledge, Bodies, and Values: Reproductive
Technologies and their Scientific Context
by Helen E. Longino
p 195-209, Technology and the Politics of Knowledge

"Philosophy is the science of solved problems."

How would a more proactive involvement of women and/or feminists in science impact reproductive technology?

How important is adherence to the "natural" form of reproduction?
How much control should technique have over natural processes?
If nature defines humanity, to what extent can it be replaced by technique / technology?
How much should it matter to us if technology redefines our reproductive nature?

Why is reproductive technology so much more of a concern than other forms of biotechnology (i.e. vision correction devices or surgery)?

Feminists are concerned with claiming motherhood as women's right (not to be overtaken by science / men), as well as denying that motherhood is essential to womanhood.
Can women separate themselves from traditional societal roles and still claim procreation as their turf?

Do high tech solutions reserve technique for the upper classes and deny more basic and fundamental medical needs to the lower?
Would a more universal emphasis on low-tech solutions meet more people's needs?

Decoding Longino's last two sentences:
To make technologies more universally beneficial, we must depend on these new ideas, taking into consideration societal values in a broader sense than they have thus far been considered.

Applying Ellul to Longino: Technology cannot tolerate conscience.