User Tag List

First 7151617181927 Last

Results 161 to 170 of 276

  1. #161
    Senior Member Helios's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    273

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nerd Girl View Post
    When you say "generic feminism," you're talking about both formal definitions of "feminism", correct? I'm basing that on your equation above. Here are the formal definitions I'm referring to:

    1. Belief in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes.
    2. The movement organized around this belief.

    It's the second definition that disturbs you, no? (As represented by the second half of your equation.) Because of the unknown and the knowns of what that entails in the present. Which explains why you don't care about the history of the feminist movement. You are only concerned with the present state of affairs that affects you now and not what led up to it. Am I right??

    So you coined the term "generic feminism" to encompass the second definition of feminism (above) and all of its 'knows' and 'unknowns' to *you*, correct?

    In summary, you agree with the first definition of equality for the sexes, but not the second definition, as it also applies to the present state of the feminism movement, which you don't agree with 100% of what's being advocated there, correct?
    Not quite, but you're considerably closer than anyone else in this thread. It's rather refreshing.

    Now:

    "2. The movement organized around this belief."

    and

    "{miscellaneous propositions}"

    are not synonymous. As subsequent elaboration has explained, the propositions populating the "{miscellaneous propositions}" category are all manifestly false ("absurd"); I could just as easily name this category "{manifestly false miscellaneous propositions}". Moreover, it'd be fair to say that the propositions all share some relation to "gender issues". Additionally, the category holds millions of propositions, some of which have yet to be conceived of in the mind of any person.

    What matters is that when someone assents to Feminism, they are likely assenting to "generic Feminism"; when they assent to generic Feminism, they accept at least one of the propositions belonging to the {miscellaneous propositions} category (all of which are (manifestly) false!); and, in doing this, have bought into a ludicrous ideology.

    I hope this is clear for you. If not, I welcome any further queries.

  2. #162
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    How tedious this is. All Helios has done is make a definition which allows him to say that feminism is false without engaging in any sort of substantive discussion on the subject or properly defending his position. It's like me saying that "I believe Christianity to be false, if Christianity means belief in things that I believe to be false."

    The problem, which I have been saying over and over, is that Helios is failing to recognize that no matter how much he says that the {miscellaneous propositions} are all false, that cannot possibly be true in reality unless he's excluding other gender-feminism-related propositions that are true but which, for some reason, are not included in the formula. And if he's doing that, then the definition makes no sense because those propositions should certainly be included, but if they were, then his rejection of "generic feminism" would be incorrect.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  3. #163
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,022

    Default

    Helios: I wouldn't say I hate watermelons if they didn't have seeds. Without seeds I would like watermelons. But since there are watermelons with seeds, I reject watermelons.

    Other members: Not all watermelons have seeds.

    Helios: If all watermelons were seedless, I would like watermelons. But since there are watermelons with seeds, I hate watermelons.

    Other members: But not all watermelons have seeds. They're mostly sold seedless nowadays.

    Helios: But there are still watermelons with seeds so I hate watermelons.

    Other members:

  4. #164
    Senior Member Helios's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    273

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jenaphor View Post
    Helios: I wouldn't say I hate watermelons if they didn't have seeds. Without seeds I would like watermelons. But since there are watermelons with seeds, I reject watermelons.

    Other members: Not all watermelons have seeds.

    Helios: If all watermelons were seedless, I would like watermelons. But since there are watermelons with seeds, I hate watermelons.

    Other members: But not all watermelons have seeds. They're mostly sold seedless nowadays.

    Helios: But there are still watermelons with seeds so I hate watermelons.

    Other members:
    Not even vaguely analogous to the present situation. What a pity. I should also note that the post to which I'm responding and your post previous to it both beg the question.

    Incidentally, is English your first language?

  5. #165
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Helios View Post
    Not even vaguely analogous to the present situation. What a pity.

    Incidentally, is English your first language?
    Her example makes perfect sense to me and I majored in English literature. It is a perfectly apt metaphor, as was her previous strawberry example, as was Orangey's "greeb" example.

  6. #166
    Senior Member Helios's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    273

    Default

    Relevant. A more authoritative source :

    A stipulative definition imparts a meaning to the defined term, and involves no commitment that the assigned meaning agrees with prior uses (if any) of the term. Stipulative definitions are epistemologically special. One has a right to stipulatively define terms as one sees fit; the constraints here are practical, not epistemological.
    One wonders why several members of Typology Central seem to take such exception to this.

  7. #167
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    May 2009
    MBTI
    ISFP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx
    Socionics
    SEE Fi
    Posts
    25,301

    Default

    I think you're either a troll or a highly verbose individual who has mistaken a large vocabulary full of academic jargon and grammatical precision for ability to both present and comprehend SUBSTANCE.

    You fail on both making good examples for the substance of your argument and also for the ability to comprehend the substance in others'.

    You're blinded by words. You miss the forest for the trees. You have an overwhelming amount of Si/Fe.

  8. #168
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Relevant.

    Definist

    The definist fallacy occurs when someone unfairly defines a term so that a controversial position is made easier to defend. Same as the Persuasive Definition.

    Example:

    During a controversy about the truth or falsity of atheism, the fallacious reasoner says, “Let’s define ‘atheist’ as someone who doesn’t yet realize that God exists.”
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  9. #169
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,022

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Helios View Post
    Not even vaguely analogous to the present situation. What a pity. I should also note that the post to which I'm responding and your post previous to it both beg the question.
    Denying an analogy doesn't make it inaccurate.

    Incidentally, is English your first language?
    Difficult to say since there were three being absorbed simultaneously.

  10. #170
    Senior Member Viridian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    MBTI
    IsFJ
    Posts
    3,088

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Not the Dodge one. It just makes me want to wring someone's neck.
    How dare those women expect men to behave with some sort of civility? It's as if we were something other than beer-drinking troglodytes!

    Quote Originally Posted by kyuuei View Post
    Also, Lol @ cussing being automatically taken as, somewhat ironically, emotional outbursts just because it came from a woman. Or are you going to try and salvage your "somewhat ironic" snide remark and try to say it wasn't hinting at the fact that you feel women cannot debate without emotional outbursts?
    Women can't argue, silly, they can only nag and overreact! Haven't you read my post circa page three of this thread?

Similar Threads

  1. Enneagram: degree of frequency of the differents variants.
    By Speed Gavroche in forum Enneagram
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 11-29-2017, 05:51 PM
  2. Testing your degree of Trumpness
    By Typh0n in forum Online Personality Tests
    Replies: 28
    Last Post: 07-24-2017, 08:38 AM
  3. Works of fiction and feminism
    By Viridian in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 09-21-2011, 10:29 PM
  4. To those who identify with some aspect(s) of feminism....
    By Qre:us in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 194
    Last Post: 08-13-2010, 06:47 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO