• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

Woman and man's highest calling- Cherokee proverb

Pseudo

New member
Joined
Jul 2, 2012
Messages
2,051
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Well prove it then, or join the club. Thinking isn't enough when it comes to objective truth. Therefore, if we are to apply rigor, you must not only think or generalize this, you must prove it to be true, otherwise you are leading to bad things and contradicting yourself as well.

If there's even one case where a generalization leads to a good thing, then your statement is false.


Correct! I should have said " In my experience generalizations tend to result in bad things". A modification in language that makes a formerly unprovable statement a more accurate description of my thought and lack of definitive knowledge. More nuanced, more true.
 

sprinkles

Mojibake
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
2,959
MBTI Type
INFJ
Well, I was using the theory of biological differences to support my philosophical and spiritual thoughts on the matter, which I think make sense in and of themselves. Some people disagree, and that's fine. The philosophy was the point of my thoughts on the matter. I'm going to agree with you that it's a valid viewpoint that gender differences are purely physical. I said my piece and I'm not going to push it.

But if you want to discuss biological differences, here's a thought: Some systems of thought suggest that people are purely physical beings, that all psychology, thought, emotion, and personality stem from physical phenomena such as hormones, electrical impulses, and survival needs. We are material beings. Some people take the opposite viewpoint and suggest that we are purely spirits inhabiting a physical body. Personally I think the answer is a little of both. So; if you are a materialist, you would have to believe that physical states influence psychological states and behavior. Correct? If true, then physical differences in gender would necessarily influence psychological states and behavior to some extent.

The question is how much. That I don't know, and is highly individual.

As far as I can tell, all things arise physically. How else would they?

For example, if there's a spirit that does things in a non-physical 'mystical' way, how does it even interact with matter? More importantly, why would we even need the spirit? If there's no material connection then it's just as easy for something to come from nothing.

If God defied physics to make the universe, then while were on the subject of defying physics, then why couldn't the universe also defy physics and make itself?

Hence, I say all things arise interdependently and physically. If there's a thought, there's a thinker. If there's a concept, somebody encapsulated it. Paganism to me is animism. Spirit is a name for a physical process. Divinity and sacredness is literal uncorrupted harmony.

The only thing that is mystical are things that we don't completely understand, and there are a lot of them.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Consider. Humankind are animals/mammals that by sheer accident and the drive for survival, have evolved into mammals that have a higher consciousness. Beyond that, the rest is construct where purpose is what each individual or community makes it. That's the substance of good/evil. It's a matter of abide or not by construct and if your choice is not to abide, there will be human inflicted consequences whether social shunning or punishment.

Existing past death? Who cares. Once we die, it's all moot.

The above to me is so freeing, rather than frightening. Free to be who we wish to be when we're willing to pay the price tag that freedom comes with, whether in labour or some other quantifiable or unquantifiable cost.

I agree with this. Believe it or not.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Female soulfulness?

Also, I don't see how something can describe humanity if it is untrue for some humans. It can describe some of humanity, some relationships. I see a great divides between things that are generally correct and absolutely true.

Nothing is true for all humans, except perhaps death. And Hindus would argue that point as well, as some of their saints are said to be immortal. So nothing is absolutely true.

Edit:
[MENTION=16048]Pseudo[/MENTION]

Very few things apply to all people. Even if you redefined every single word it probably still wouldn't apply to all people.

All we do is find an approximation that we feel is 'good enough'. What level of scrutiny this approximation must entail varies between individuals, so that's yet another thing that doesn't apply to all people.
Yeah, what sprinkles said.
 

Pseudo

New member
Joined
Jul 2, 2012
Messages
2,051
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Yes, that is pretty much it.


Fair enough.


Well, I was using the theory of biological differences to support my philosophical and spiritual thoughts on the matter, which I think make sense in and of themselves. Some people disagree, and that's fine. The philosophy was the point of my thoughts on the matter. I'm going to agree with you that it's a valid viewpoint that gender differences are purely physical. I said my piece and I'm not going to push it.

But if you want to discuss biological differences, here's a thought: Some systems of thought suggest that people are purely physical beings, that all psychology, thought, emotion, and personality stem from physical phenomena such as hormones, electrical impulses, and survival needs. We are material beings. Some people take the opposite viewpoint and suggest that we are purely spirits inhabiting a physical body. Personally I think the answer is a little of both. So; if you are a materialist, you would have to believe that physical states influence psychological states and behavior. Correct? If true, then physical differences in gender would necessarily influence psychological states and behavior to some extent.

The question is how much. That I don't know, and is highly individual.


I don't disagree that their are physical differences but I do question the extent to which they shape our personalities. Most for the reasons I stated previously that women all don't function in the same way. You could have two women which have very dissimilar personalities and a man and a women with very similar personalities. For example of these three people who is the outlier: Sarah Palin, Glen beck, Andy Worhol.

I'm not denying that gender is a factor in shaping a person, I'm just denying that it is the most significant or lone factor.
 

MacGuffin

Permabanned
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
10,710
MBTI Type
xkcd
Enneagram
9w1
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Wrong.

Irrational means contradicting rationality. Non-rational means rationality doesn't apply.

It's like this:

rationality<---------->irrationality


non-rational

I don't speak NF.

"Non" means "not". Non-rational means not rational. Not rational is irrational.

You can't re-define things because they don't agree with with your irrational values.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
False. Truth is truth. Truth is not subjective.

I think this implies the answer to most questions is more complex and takes a longer, more nuanced answer than we generally give but I think that it is worth it for things to be True. I feel the acceptance of generalizations and stereotypes leads to bad things.


EDIT: If truth is subjective it becomes meaningless.

I like sushi. This is true. And it is subjective. And this truth is very meaningful to me.
 

Pseudo

New member
Joined
Jul 2, 2012
Messages
2,051
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
As far as I can tell, all things arise physically. How else would they?

For example, if there's a spirit that does things in a non-physical 'mystical' way, how does it even interact with matter? More importantly, why would we even need the spirit? If there's no material connection then it's just as easy for something to come from nothing.

If God defied physics to make the universe, then while were on the subject of defying physics, then why couldn't the universe also defy physics and make itself?

Hence, I say all things arise interdependently and physically. If there's a thought, there's a thinker. If there's a concept, somebody encapsulated it. Paganism to me is animism. Spirit is a name for a physical process. Divinity and sacredness is literal uncorrupted harmony.

The only thing that is mystical are things that we don't completely understand, and there are a lot of them.

I agree with you in the sense that physical experience seems to be the only way we can experience anything, material or spiritual, because we a are physical beings. I agree with you last sentence too.

But I think they physical realities of our world go beyond our own bodies. So while being female influences my thoughts and actions so does my geographic location, the bodies of others around me ect. Also my body is not the same as every other woman's body. There is extreme genetic variety between women so it still doesn't follow that we would be treated as a homogenous group with a single function, even if we agree that all things arise from the physical.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
i'm trying stick with my interpretation of the proverb without typing the same expression over and over... i get bored :)

then the only thing we should say is that all humans are composed of carbon.

Right. +1 This applies to all humans. :) Yay, we have objective absolute Truth!
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I like sushi. This is true. And it is subjective. And this truth is very meaningful to me.

Uhhh.... It's not subjective that you like sushi. It's objectively true that you like sushi. You can say, "I like sushi," as a fact.

However, your liking for sushi is subjective, as it is based on your preferences. Just because you like sushi does not mean that sushi is good to everyone. So you can not say, "Sushi is good [to everyone]" as an objective fact.
 

Pseudo

New member
Joined
Jul 2, 2012
Messages
2,051
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
I like sushi. This is true. And it is subjective. And this truth is very meaningful to me.

Except that it is not subjective. You do objectively enjoy sushi. It would be subjective and untrue if you said that "Sushi is the best tasting food"
 

sprinkles

Mojibake
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
2,959
MBTI Type
INFJ
Correct! I should have said " In my experience generalizations tend to result in bad things". A modification in language that makes a formerly unprovable statement a more accurate description of my thought and lack of definitive knowledge. More nuanced, more true.

Yeah. Problem is we don't know what's true until we verify it. Thus arises a conundrum: how do you know when you've verified it?

Just look at what happened with physics which is relatively easy to verify. We went from the luminiferous aether to Newtonian mechanics to Einstein to finding the Higgs Boson and we still aren't entirely sure about very much. They built the LHC and found something and they weren't even sure if that something was the thing or not.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I don't speak NF.

"Non" means "not". Non-rational means not rational. Not rational is irrational.

You can't re-define things because they don't agree with with your irrational values.

No, what I'm saying is that contradiction implies existing on the same continuum, or in the same dimension. Non-application means it neither is consistent nor inconsistent, because it is on a different continuum/ in a different dimension. Is this NT speak?

Let's get more T. We could say that P and ~P are a contradiction, which is a logical inconsistency. P and an orange is not a logical inconsistency because one is a logical component and one is not. Oranges do not exist on a logical continuum.

Or, two points on a line are opposite to each other, which could be seen as a contradiction. A point on a line parallel to it is not in opposition to either, because the lines do not intersect. Or a point in another quadrant of the graph is not in opposition because it does not touch the line.

By the same line of thinking rationality and non-rationality (or whatever you want to call spirituality and such) are non contradictory. Rationality and spirituality do not apply to each other.
 

Pseudo

New member
Joined
Jul 2, 2012
Messages
2,051
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Yeah. Problem is we don't know what's true until we verify it. Thus arises a conundrum: how do you know when you've verified it?

Just look at what happened with physics which is relatively easy to verify. We went from the luminiferous aether to Newtonian mechanics to Einstein to finding the Higgs Boson and we still aren't entirely sure about very much. They built the LHC and found something and they weren't even sure if that something was the thing or not.

You don't know but it doesn't mean the truth doesn't exist. If something exist in reality it is theoretically knowable. Is there a God? I cannot definitively affirm or deny that, however the fact remains that there either is or is not a God.

The examples you presented illustrate the search for truth, which would not continue if people had just settled for a generalization of what was going on. Physicists do not know for certain how the universe works however we can assume that it does work is some way. Whether that is congruent with our current understanding or not. Whether it's laws are fixed or shifting. There is a Truth about it.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Except that it is not subjective. You do objectively enjoy sushi. It would be subjective and untrue if you said that "Sushi is the best tasting food"

I don't know about that. Can you prove I actually do enjoy sushi and I'm not just making it up or imagining it?
 

sprinkles

Mojibake
Joined
Jul 5, 2012
Messages
2,959
MBTI Type
INFJ
You don't know but it doesn't mean the truth doesn't exist. If something exist in reality it is theoretically knowable. Is there a God? I cannot definitively affirm or deny that, however the fact remains that there either is or is not a God.

The examples you presented illustrate the search for truth, which would not continue if people had just settled for a generalization of what was going on.

Right, and if we are to have a discussion we must suspend this process intermittently and say 'this is the state of things as far as I can tell at this moment.'

Otherwise we may as well not even speak. People want to talk about things that are senseless? I think having to caveat everything with "I don't actually know, but" makes pretty much everything useless. And if we want to get super technical, then the pedants in this thread are probably being more feelery about this stuff than the alleged feelers are.
 

Totenkindly

@.~*virinaĉo*~.@
Joined
Apr 19, 2007
Messages
50,187
MBTI Type
BELF
Enneagram
594
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I don't know about that. Can you prove I actually do enjoy sushi and I'm not just making it up or imagining it?

lol. You're incorrigible.

Back to OP:

Thoughts?

I think this is lovely.

It could be said that things of this nature have a bit of a heterosexual bias, but it could just as easily be platonic; and man or woman could be whichever of the feminine or masculine polarities you identify with (doesn't have to be biological).

I've seen similar things before.

Aside from the fact that it might reflect something specific in terms of gender breakdown within Cherokee culture (so it might not be as applicable in other cultures), it just seems to focus on general differences where men in the culture focus on tasks in the world whereas women are viewed as more easily building community and being in touch with their souls (kind of the Yin/Yang thing), and thus each of them uses their particular focus and abilities in a way that is beneficial to the other and/or invites the other into their particular area of strength.

Of course, you're going to get into all these arguments of "Do souls even exist?" and "what is source?" and "Why do women need protecting?" and "Gee, isn't this shallow / Aren't there greater things to aspire to than this?" and "Are these gender categories and roles even relevant and accurate?" And so on. This forum in particular will be a tough sell on these things, as gender assumptions / categories are challenged here by many.

But that is how I interpreted the quote.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
I don't disagree that their are physical differences but I do question the extent to which they shape our personalities. Most for the reasons I stated previously that women all don't function in the same way. You could have two women which have very dissimilar personalities and a man and a women with very similar personalities. For example of these three people who is the outlier: Sarah Palin, Glen beck, Andy Worhol.

I'm not denying that gender is a factor in shaping a person, I'm just denying that it is the most significant or lone factor.

True. I don't think it is the most significant factor either.
 

greenfairy

philosopher wood nymph
Joined
May 25, 2012
Messages
4,024
MBTI Type
iNfj
Enneagram
6w5
Instinctual Variant
sx/sp
Uhhh.... It's not subjective that you like sushi. It's objectively true that you like sushi. You can say, "I like sushi," as a fact.

However, your liking for sushi is subjective, as it is based on your preferences. Just because you like sushi does not mean that sushi is good to everyone. So you can not say, "Sushi is good [to everyone]" as an objective fact.

Right. And the only thing I am asserting as an objective fact is the concept of balance. Some of the philosophical things I said in my wall of text in post #30 I would also argue to be objective truth, but not many as it is relating to a subjective quotation.
 

Pseudo

New member
Joined
Jul 2, 2012
Messages
2,051
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
I don't know about that. Can you prove I actually do enjoy sushi and I'm not just making it up or imagining it?


You are completely misunderstanding the concept.

The point is that for something to be True it must be objective. If you are lying, the Truth remains objective regardless of whether of not I am aware of it. An illustration:

The Truth: you dislike sushi
Your statment " i love sushi"
my beilief " Greenfairy loves sushi"
The Truth remains: you dislike sushi.

As for imagining I fail to see how you could Imagine you like sushi, but the same idea as above applies. You either do or do not enjoy the taste of sushi. Whether you think that this is sushi :

mcdonalds-Hamburger.png


or you have only imagined having eaten sushi, there is still an objective truth in regards to your bodies response to sushi.


What a long absurd post I've written. haha
 
Top