User Tag List

First 34567 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 70

  1. #41
    likes this gromit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    6,652

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    Well like I say, science is the same way. No one can give a precise definition of science, or of pseudo-science. That's one reason there's a branch of philosophy called philosophy of science, trying to define what it is.

    But I also argue that reason is not better than emotion. They each have their jobs and should not try to do the other's job, but they are equal in value and not mutually exclusive.

    Feminism tends to advocate valuation of emotion as equal to reason, especially ecofeminism. Reason as being superior in value to emotion and the body has been used to justify all sorts of oppression and exploitation in the past, and it still is being used this way.
    I wouldn't say that's necessarily true about feminism advocating emotion the same as reason.

    But I do agree with the rest of the post, that there are different purposes for reason and emotion, and that the wise person is able to integrate the two instead of just relying on one or the other.
    Your kisses, sweeter than honey. But guess what, so is my money.

  2. #42
    reflecting pool Typh0n's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    3,095

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    Well like I say, science is the same way. No one can give a precise definition of science, or of pseudo-science. That's one reason there's a branch of philosophy called philosophy of science, trying to define what it is.
    True. Just because we cant give a proper definition to science doesnt mean its not based on reason.

    But I also argue that reason is not better than emotion. They each have their jobs and should not try to do the other's job, but they are equal in value and not mutually exclusive.

    Feminism tends to advocate valuation of emotion as equal to reason, especially ecofeminism. Reason as being superior in value to emotion and the body has been used to justify all sorts of oppression and exploitation in the past, and it still is being used this way.
    I would say expression of emotion is healthy, as repression of it leads one to be guided by emotion. Repression also leads to health problems. However when it comes to making decisions, why do you think emotions should be used to guide us? I find that most decisions I made during my lifetime based on emotion were mistakes, though I wouldnt change anything. I dont see how emotion and passion can be seen as something you can act on with wisdom, as passion is a suspension of clear sightedness. I also said "collective" emotion. By that Im thinking of the type of political rallies like the ones under totalitarian regimes. Im not equating feminism wurh that sort of thing of course. Im just saying, I guess, that these types if rallies and the propaganda these regimes used were appeals to emotion as opposed to reason. "If you wish to control a man" Ayn Rand said "it is not his fears, his will or his emotions that stand in the way but his reason." I dont see the atrocities of mankind as based being an act of reason or intellect but of confusion, ignorance and to an extent, emotion.

  3. #43
    Senior Member yeghor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,418

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    ...Feminism tends to advocate valuation of emotion as equal to reason, especially ecofeminism. Reason as being superior in value to emotion and the body has been used to justify all sorts of oppression and exploitation in the past, and it still is being used this way.
    Perhaps this could mean integrating traits perceived to be feminine (like compassion, empathy) more into commerce, trade, politics and business, and not necessarily thru women perhaps... hopefully mitigating fierce and cutthroatish (masculine) competition and aggression in those areas...

    I think there will be instances where reason\realism would come to the forefront and some others where emotion\romanticism will... or a mixture of both... commercial practices favor ST and NT styles more (i.e. reason) whereas artistic practices favor SFs and NFs (i.e. idealism and romanticism) more... There has to be a balance...

  4. #44
    philosopher wood nymph greenfairy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    MBTI
    iNfj
    Enneagram
    6w5 sx/sp
    Posts
    4,042

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gromit View Post
    I wouldn't say that's necessarily true about feminism advocating emotion the same as reason.

    But I do agree with the rest of the post, that there are different purposes for reason and emotion, and that the wise person is able to integrate the two instead of just relying on one or the other.
    Actually ecofeminism does explicitly take this approach, though they say it in more clear terms than I just did.
    Quote Originally Posted by Typh0n View Post
    True. Just because we cant give a proper definition to science doesnt mean its not based on reason.
    True, but I also meant something more, that science doesn't have any one definition; there is a cluster of characteristics that make it up, and the same is true of feminism. It's a little different but the structure is similar. We can't give a neat definition of it because it is a sort of collective definition.
    Quote Originally Posted by Typh0n View Post
    I would say expression of emotion is healthy, as repression of it leads one to be guided by emotion. Repression also leads to health problems. However when it comes to making decisions, why do you think emotions should be used to guide us? I find that most decisions I made during my lifetime based on emotion were mistakes, though I wouldnt change anything. I dont see how emotion and passion can be seen as something you can act on with wisdom, as passion is a suspension of clear sightedness.
    Quote Originally Posted by Typh0n View Post
    I also said "collective" emotion. By that Im thinking of the type of political rallies like the ones under totalitarian regimes. Im not equating feminism wurh that sort of thing of course. Im just saying, I guess, that these types if rallies and the propaganda these regimes used were appeals to emotion as opposed to reason. "If you wish to control a man" Ayn Rand said "it is not his fears, his will or his emotions that stand in the way but his reason." I dont see the atrocities of mankind as based being an act of reason or intellect but of confusion, ignorance and to an extent, emotion.
    This is an example of one trying to do the other's job. Emotion masquerading as reason produces logical fallacies. Emotion has its place in decision making and so does reason; ideally one should be balanced with the other. I've made a lot of good decisions based on reason and a lot of bad ones when I let my emotions take over; but I think the problem wasn't simply that I was using emotion, but that I wasn't using it properly. I was using it unconsciously, and reacting rather than consciously acting. When you can use our emotions as a guide to a sort of intrapersonal and interpersonal rationality, decisions tend to be good. Trying to use reason when emotion is called for in this way is just as problematic, as you will either be ignoring your emotions telling you something important (like what you need in a given situation or what someone else needs) or your emotions will be there under the surface and influence your actions in ways you're not conscious of. So they are equally important. Not repressing emotion is the first step in using it properly.
    Quote Originally Posted by yeghor View Post
    Perhaps this could mean integrating traits perceived to be feminine (like compassion, empathy) more into commerce, trade, politics and business, and not necessarily thru women perhaps... hopefully mitigating fierce and cutthroatish (masculine) competition and aggression in those areas...

    I think there will be instances where reason\realism would come to the forefront and some others where emotion\romanticism will... or a mixture of both... commercial practices favor ST and NT styles more (i.e. reason) whereas artistic practices favor SFs and NFs (i.e. idealism and romanticism) more... There has to be a balance...
    Yes, ecofeminism in particular and many feminist philosophies advocate incorporating the feminine more into the power structure. But many also advocate changing the power structure itself (and not from male-domination to female domination, but from domination to cooperation).

    I agree, they both have their own areas of expertise. They can work together quite nicely in the same area too, or separately in their purest forms.

  5. #45
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,581

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Typh0n View Post
    How could it be an indictment of feminism if we cannot come up with a proper definition on what feminism is? Different people may define a word in different ways and this is problem as there can be only one meaning to a word. Actually there can be more than one definition, but in the case you mention you're referring to what seems to be a confusion among the folk than a word with multiple definitions.

    How would you define feminism?
    My point exactly. We cannot indict feminism when we cannot even agree on what it is. This is instead an indictment of those who base their arguments on mistaken assumptions, without any attempt at clarification. It is these conversations that generate more heat than light and are therefore useless. As for my definition, see below.

    Quote Originally Posted by Typh0n View Post
    I see. Well, that sounds kinda scary, tbh. Scary because it then seems like its an appeal to collective emotion rather than to reason.
    I can appreciate how Greenfairy's description may appear unproductively ephemeral, but would say it appeals more to common values than to emotion.

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    Well like I say, science is the same way. No one can give a precise definition of science, or of pseudo-science. That's one reason there's a branch of philosophy called philosophy of science, trying to define what it is.
    Science is the study of the natural (physicsl) world through observation and experiment. Pseudo-science refers to attempts to gain knowledge through the improper application of scientific method to questions outside the physical world. People can differ as to the best way to conduct scientific inquiry, as well as the role of scientific study in society. Philosophy of science addresses questions like these.

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    But I also argue that reason is not better than emotion. They each have their jobs and should not try to do the other's job, but they are equal in value and not mutually exclusive.
    Reason is better. This can be objective reasoning of the kind we customarily associate with the thinking function; or subjective reason which we customarily associate with Feeling. Emotion is at most one of many inputs to the reasoning or decision-making process.

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    Feminism tends to advocate valuation of emotion as equal to reason, especially ecofeminism. Reason as being superior in value to emotion and the body has been used to justify all sorts of oppression and exploitation in the past, and it still is being used this way.
    The second sentence is certainly true. The first describes a version of feminism that I do not espouse. My definition is something like: the belief that women should have the same rights, respect, and opportunities as men.

    I get rather peeved by feminist perspectives that try to accomplish this by getting people to value so-called feminine qualities like compassion, empathy, collaboration, and the whole business of enjoying the physicality of being present in the moment. The implication is that women who don't exhibit much of these traits are bad women, or trying to be men, rather than simply being women who don't fit stereotypes of femininity. We don't achieve feminist goals by rehabilitating stereotypes; we do it by dispensing with them to let everyone be the individual he or she is.
    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...

  6. #46
    The Typing Tabby grey_beard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,504

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zarathustra View Post
    Yeah, go study economics.

    Study something that isn't just a bunch of words.

    I studied one course that was very much that way (and loved it [and one of the biggest feminists out there was head of my department]), and then I studied one "harder" course, Economics. (I also studied business, but did not major in it, as, after a while, I felt Economics was not practical enough, was a little too theoretical and up in the clouds [I loved it regardless], and that studying something a bit more practical would be of benefit to my career)



    Honestly, I think you could deal with a dose of reality thrown in there.

    The problem with feminism, including what you expressed, is that it's a giant echo chamber. Once it has to actually make it out into the real world, outside of its convenient language game, it falls apart, and is no longer applicable. In some ways, yes, it still is. But the complete and total expression of it, a la what you expressed in the post I quoted, becomes absurd. It's simply not practical, nor necessarily desirable, which is why I recommended you study Economics, because, if you were to, you would likely realize this to be the case.

    And, how do I know this? Because I've seen this all before. And I've seen a person, literally more than 15 yrs into arguing against me, about similar such ideas (in his case, it was the echo chamber of Marxism), finally actually study business and economics, and come back to me and say, "You know what, Z, all these years, you've been right and I've been wrong. Everything I was obsessing over was simply not the real world. It was impractical as fuck, and ignored all kinds of important realities about how the world actually operates, and why it does, that I didn't realize. And, frankly, that you were always pointing to, trying to get me to realize, but I just didn't understand, cuz I hadn't studied it." That's obviously a paraphrase, but it's pretty much spot on. That was after a lifelong friend of mine, who had majored in Sociology and something else, can't remember what, went to grad school, and got his JD/MBA (it was in studying for his MBA that he had these realizations). He had previously been a dedicated Marxist since we were pretty much middle schoolers.



    Yeah, I gathered as much.

    Believe it or not, it's a very typical thing one sees amongst people going to college.



    They do look alike.

    It was the INFJ coincidence that made me have to ask, tho.

    And, how do I know this? Because I've seen this all before. And I've seen a person, literally more than 15 yrs into arguing against me, about similar such ideas (in his case, it was the echo chamber of Marxism), finally actually study business and economics, and come back to me and say, "You know what, Z, all these years, you've been right and I've been wrong. Everything I was obsessing over was simply not the real world. It was impractical as fuck, and ignored all kinds of important realities about how the world actually operates, and why it does, that I didn't realize. And, frankly, that you were always pointing to, trying to get me to realize, but I just didn't understand, cuz I hadn't studied it." That's obviously a paraphrase, but it's pretty much spot on. That was after a lifelong friend of mine, who had majored in Sociology and something else, can't remember what, went to grad school, and got his JD/MBA (it was in studying for his MBA that he had these realizations). He had previously been a dedicated Marxist since we were pretty much middle schoolers.


    Go read The Servile State by Hilaire Belloc. He predicted in this book, in 1913 (before the Russian revolution) that the conflict of Communism and Capitalism would give rise to the modern welfare state.
    "Love never needs time. But friendship always needs time. More and more and more time, up to long past midnight." -- The Crime of Captain Gahagan

    Please comment on my johari / nohari pages.

  7. #47
    The Typing Tabby grey_beard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    1,504

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by greenfairy View Post
    Well like I say, science is the same way. No one can give a precise definition of science, or of pseudo-science. That's one reason there's a branch of philosophy called philosophy of science, trying to define what it is.

    But I also argue that reason is not better than emotion. They each have their jobs and should not try to do the other's job, but they are equal in value and not mutually exclusive.

    Feminism tends to advocate valuation of emotion as equal to reason, especially ecofeminism. Reason as being superior in value to emotion and the body has been used to justify all sorts of oppression and exploitation in the past, and it still is being used this way.
    Reproducibility based on observation under controlled conditions.
    "Love never needs time. But friendship always needs time. More and more and more time, up to long past midnight." -- The Crime of Captain Gahagan

    Please comment on my johari / nohari pages.

  8. #48
    WALMART
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    Isn't feminism just another form of collectivist prejudice in the same sense that racism is?
    If you are living in mind maybe a few decades from now, perhaps some noumenal plane of hindsight in a far distant land.

    No one today has time for that level of understanding.

  9. #49
    Senior Member BlackDog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    MBTI
    NiTe
    Enneagram
    9w8 so/sx
    Posts
    572

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SolitaryWalker View Post
    Isn't feminism just another form of collectivist prejudice in the same sense that racism is? Racists make sweeping generalizations about the allegedly malevolent intentions of people of different skin color, but don't the feminists do the same thing?

    Collectively, the white people have done a lot of harm to the blacks by colonizing their territories. You could argue that collectively, men have done the same to women over millennia.

    Yet in both cases, the harmful actions were not caused by any malevolent intentions. The Europeans were merely pursuing their self-interest by seeking to expand their empires and patriarchs did likewise by seeking to extend their personal power.

    In a lot of cases, both groups displayed callousness, myopia and even unimaginable ignorance. However, the vilification is simply unwarranted because a very small percentage of members of those groups were guided by intentions of inflicting harm upon those who suffered as a result of their actions.

    I think that this is the fundamental problem with feminism itself: it unduly ascribes sinister motives to actors of history who scarcely even considered the true outcomes of their actions.

    The pioneers of feminist thought such as Mary Wollstonecraft and Jane Austen endeavored to address the structural causes of gender inequity. They focused on institutional, economic, sociocultural and political aspects of the problem. By and large, the severest of problems of patriarchy have been resolved. That is evident in light of the fact that a significant percentage of prestigious professional positions are held by women.

    In the absence of the grossest of gender inequality problems, the modern feminists are left with little choice but to engage in crass misandry that is quite similar to the practices of racists. Both groups focus not on the fundamental causes of injustice, but on the imagined nefarious motives of groups that they regard as their adversaries.
    Take back that Jane Austen was a feminist, or had any role in the development of feminism. It's a gross misapplication. I dispute it. I've read all of her books from cover to cover at least five times, and I've written extensively on them. I even won a national essay contest over one of her books. I know Jane Austen, and she wasn't a feminist remotely. If anything, she was a dyed-in-the-wool conservative defending her class system.

    Nothing against you, but I can't let that one pass.

  10. #50
    Tenured roisterer SolitaryWalker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w6 so/sx
    Posts
    3,467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Lion 4.5 View Post
    Take back that Jane Austen was a feminist, or had any role in the development of feminism.

    Nothing against you, but I can't let that one pass.
    I think there is considerable debate about the role she supposedly played in the early feminist movement. Why was she not a feminist?
    "Do not argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience." -- Mark Twain

    “No man but a blockhead ever wrote, except for money.”---Samuel Johnson

    My blog: www.randommeanderings123.blogspot.com/

Similar Threads

  1. Early Menstruation and Teen Depression
    By Nomenclature in forum Science, Technology, and Future Tech
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 08-14-2011, 02:48 AM
  2. [MBTItm] Early thirties and direction in life
    By musttry in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 06-26-2011, 05:39 PM
  3. Feminism and WW2
    By nolla in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06-22-2011, 03:08 AM
  4. Abstract and Modern Art
    By Arclight in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 04-01-2011, 01:39 PM
  5. Early education and my endless search to do the "right" thing.
    By Tigerlily in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-07-2009, 03:11 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