User Tag List

First 17252627282937 Last

Results 261 to 270 of 581

  1. #261
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    no one called it sexist. but there was an actual implication that you suspected sexism. i will always laugh when people think that the concepts of social and rational have any relevance to one another. but yet you ignored this side of the argument completely and went straight ahead with the feminist agenda. if you're a female, well that could be a self interest thing. i suspect it has more to do with brainwashing by peer pressure.
    the values invoked by the proverb are seen in every culture i've ever heard of. it could be that those values were simply carried down through every generation since the pangea-mother culture the rest of us must have spawned from. more likely, we have biological motivations/incentives for acting that way.
    when you say that these things are necessarily not the highest calling [and i sense undertones that you discourage the things suggested in the proverb], you say equally that men and women have no need for one another at all.

    the truth is, even if protectiveness of females is not something we see in males in their individual relationships, or soulfulness of females in the same, it exists on the large scale all the same.
    it's not an insult to either "gender" [i'm pretty sure you mean sex]. it's just humanity.
    the only insult is spun by a perspective which holds that women under protection by men are weak.
    Agreed.

  2. #262
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    It is no different than believing in God. My personal beliefs involve God and Goddess, to some degree mirroring the masculine/feminine complementarity we have been discussing here, but I see it as informative rather than normative. In other words, they are archetypes that demonstrate the duality of human attributes, without requiring any 1-to-1 mapping in actual humans (could be the P and Q sets of traits I referenced above). Seeing them as masculine/feminine, male/female makes for some pretty poetry, but that's it.

    There are some questions I don't think science will ever answer, because I see the answers as inherently subjective. These include: why are we here? what is our purpose in life? how should we relate to each other and the world around us? what is right/wrong, or good/evil, and do these distinctions even make sense? is there a god/deity/higher power, and if so, what is its nature? does any part of us continue after bodily death, and if so, what happens to it? This last might eventually be explained by science, but my belief for now is that the explanation will not be complete. In short, science attempts to understand objective reality, while spirituality examines subjective purposes. Much of the science/religion debate comes from one trying to operate in the sphere of the other.
    Agreed, and I mostly identify with this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    In short, science attempts to understand objective reality, while spirituality examines subjective purposes. Much of the science/religion debate comes from one trying to operate in the sphere of the other.
    This is what I've been saying all along. (Over and over...)

  3. #263
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,585

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    when you say that these things are necessarily not the highest calling [and i sense that you discourage those behaviors suggested in the proverb], you say equally that men and women have no need for one another at all.
    No. I am saying that the fundamental human need of people for each other transcends differences of sex/gender. I discourage anything targeted with such bias. I encourage everyone to give protection where it is needed, and spiritual/emotional comfort and guidance as well.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  4. #264
    Senior Member Pseudo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    2,051

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    Yeah, post #30.

    What you are saying is that the proverb should actually read:

    The role of the feminine attributes of an individuals personality is to balance out the masculine aspects of the personality and allow the individual to have a healthy existance.
    The role of masculine attributes of the personality are to allow for the vulnerability to exist by guarding it from the harshness of the world.

    ?

    I feel like that is what you want the proverb to mean despite the fact that it doesn't say that. It dosen't say it literally or through metaphor. It only functions this way if you redefine man and woman so that the terms don't actually refer to the sex of the individuals. Perhaps this is a problem of translation. If you take it as it is written it doesn't apply to all people.

    I'm still confused as to why you are uninterested in talking about whether or not what you are saying is actually true. You keep refusing to give any kind of examples which is frustrating because it kind of kills the thread. I guess from my perspective I always want to base my belief in whether or not to holds up to rigorous argument. It's almost like you are shielding your opinions from debate so as not to lose any confidence in them. If you truly believe that are legitimate then to be you should share them so we can have an actual discussion.

  5. #265
    Permabanned
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    xkcd
    Enneagram
    9w1 sx/sp
    Socionics
    INT_
    Posts
    10,733

    Default

    All religion is irrational.

  6. #266
    nee andante bechimo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,028

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    It is no different than believing in God. My personal beliefs involve God and Goddess, to some degree mirroring the masculine/feminine complementarity we have been discussing here, but I see it as informative rather than normative. In other words, they are archetypes that demonstrate the duality of human attributes, without requiring any 1-to-1 mapping in actual humans (could be the P and Q sets of traits I referenced above). Seeing them as masculine/feminine, male/female makes for some pretty poetry, but that's it.
    But why even bother with this? Isn't science enough with theoreticals and concrete realities? Also, is there really a dichotomy or just another construct?

    There are some questions I don't think science will ever answer, because I see the answers as inherently subjective. These include: why are we here? what is our purpose in life? how should we relate to each other and the world around us? what is right/wrong, or good/evil, and do these distinctions even make sense? is there a god/deity/higher power, and if so, what is its nature? does any part of us continue after bodily death, and if so, what happens to it? This last might eventually be explained by science, but my belief for now is that the explanation will not be complete. In short, science attempts to understand objective reality, while spirituality examines subjective purposes. Much of the science/religion debate comes from one trying to operate in the sphere of the other.
    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.

  7. #267
    Senior Member Pseudo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 so/sx
    Posts
    2,051

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    no one called it sexist. but there was an actual implication that you suspected sexism. i will always laugh when people think that the concepts of social and rational have any relevance to one another. but yet you ignored this side of the argument completely and went straight ahead with the feminist agenda. if you're a female, well that could be a self interest thing. i suspect it has more to do with brainwashing by peer pressure.
    the values invoked by the proverb are seen consistently in every culture i've ever heard of. it could be that those values were simply carried down through every generation since the pangea-mother culture the rest of us must have spawned from, but more likely, we have biological motivations/incentives for acting that way.
    when you say that these things are necessarily not the highest calling [and i sense that you discourage those behaviors suggested in the proverb], you say equally that men and women have no need for one another at all.

    the truth is, even if protectiveness of females is not something we see in males in their individual relationships, or soulfulness of females in the same, it exists on the macro scale all the same.
    it's not an insult to either "gender" [i'm pretty sure you mean sex]: it's just humanity.
    the only insult is spun by a perspective which holds that women under protection by men are weak.
    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.

  8. #268
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    when you say that these things are necessarily not the highest calling [and i sense that you discourage those behaviors suggested in the proverb], you say equally that men and women have no need for one another at all.
    Pray tell, by what operation did you manage to get from the premises to conclusion here?

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    the truth is, even if protectiveness of females is not something we see in males in their individual relationships, or soulfulness of females in the same, it exists on the macro scale all the same.
    I don't think anybody said that they hadn't heard of it, or that it was a construct that didn't exist. Unfortunately, its existence alone does not explain anything about its origins or (least of all) whether it is worthwhile as a way of looking at gender relations. That's the equivalent of me insisting that the fact of a rock's existence is proof that we should worship rocks.

    Quote Originally Posted by Nocapszy View Post
    it's not an insult to either "gender" [i'm pretty sure you mean sex]: it's just humanity.
    I agree that it's not an insult to anyone. It's merely silliness. And I think your insistence on "sex" instead of "gender" goes against @greenfairy's qualification that we're talking about energies, not genitalia.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  9. #269
    Mojibake sprinkles's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Posts
    2,968

    Default

    @Pseudo

    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.

  10. #270
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MacGuffin View Post
    All religion is irrational.
    Agreed.

    (Which is why I focus on spirituality, which is non-rational.)

Similar Threads

  1. Older woman younger man
    By Butterfly in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 80
    Last Post: 05-17-2012, 06:27 AM
  2. [NF] F woman and T man
    By INTPness in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 05-15-2010, 03:22 AM
  3. [NF] If you had infinite money,land, and man-power... What would you do for fun?
    By ObeyBunny in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-10-2010, 12:05 AM
  4. The good life and man's relation to society
    By SolitaryWalker in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 63
    Last Post: 07-23-2008, 11:43 AM

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