Methodology is hardly a hot topic in dominant Western philosophy. How methodology in philosophy might be framed by dominant social (mis)beliefs and actively reinforces social injustices is barely a topic at all. We still, as students and researchers, have to learn how to conduct our research and how to share them in academic contexts. We learn that, as philosophers, there is “good” and “relevant” questions to ask, “good” and “adequate” ways to address them, and “good” or “appropriate” content we can mobilize to make “our point”. We also get to know that those relevant, adequate, appropriate ways of doing philosophy are barely questionable and that it is all but too risky to question them as “early career”, easily disposable, researchers.

In this talk, I take the latter to actively participate in what makes methodology a powerful way of excluding and dismissing marginalized voices in philosophy. I will here focus on trans* and queer voices. Drawing on the work jointly done with Guido Caniglia (forthcoming), I will first present how we, as two openly queer (Guido Caniglia) and transmasculine (myself) philosophers, understand the processes of “trans*ing” and “queering” methodology in the particular context of Western philosophy of science. I will explain why we distinguish between trans*-based, queer-based and “anti-cisheteronormative” methodologies in philosophy, and insist on the collective and individual responsibilities and obligations those approaches rely on and come with. I will then present some of the trans*- and queer-based “strategies” and “orientations” we identified in the philosophy and scientific literature and that, we believe, might support trans*, queer, and anti-cisheteronormative ways of doing philosophy of science. I will conclude with a brief glance at how those questions matter for the fields of philosophy of ecology and environmental philosophy I have specialized in.