User Tag List

First 21011121314 Last

Results 111 to 120 of 156

  1. #111
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eileen View Post
    You can call it what you want, but I'm calling it a spade.
    You can certainly call it whatever you want, and I'll keep correcting you each time. Stubborness in error is not a virtue.

  2. #112
    Senior Member Eileen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6?
    Posts
    2,191

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post
    You can certainly call it whatever you want, and I'll keep correcting you each time. Stubborness in error is not a virtue.
    Yeah, I'm rubber and you're glue. Here's an article from Wikipedia on ideology: Ideology - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia You have a "set of beliefs, aims, and ideas" which have possible political implications. You have a set of beliefs that was at least once "proposed by the dominant class of a society to all members of this society," and your purpose here seems to be to "offer change in society through a normative thought process."

    Here's another good bit from that article:

    David W. Minar describes six different ways in which the word "ideology" has been used:

    1. As a collection of certain ideas with certain kinds of content, usually normative;
    2. As the form or internal logical structure that ideas have within a set;
    3. By the role in which ideas play in human-social interaction;
    4. By the role that ideas play in the structure of an organization;
    5. As meaning, whose purpose is persuasion; and
    6. As the locus of social interaction, possibly.

    For Willard A. Mullins, an ideology is composed of four basic characteristics:

    1. it must have power over cognitions;
    2. it must be capable of guiding one's evaluations;
    3. it must provide guidance towards action;
    4. and, as stated above, must be logically coherent.
    I think you can pretty much check each point off if you're honest with yourself.
    INFJ

    "I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be. You can never be what you ought to be until I am what I ought to be. This is the interrelated structure of reality." -Martin Luther King, Jr.

  3. #113
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    I can post links to Wikipedia as well:
    Social philosophy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Political philosophy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Social philosophy is the philosophical study of questions about social behavior (typically, of humans). Social philosophy addresses a wide range of subjects, from individual meanings to legitimacy of laws, from the social contract to criteria for revolution, from the functions of everyday actions to the effects of science on culture, from changes in human demographics to the collective order of a wasp's nest.

    Social philosophy attempts to understand the patterns and nuances, changes and tendencies of societies. It is a wide field with many subdisciplines.
    Political philosophy is the study of questions about the city, government, politics, liberty, justice, property, rights, law and the enforcement of a legal code by authority: what they are, why (or even if) they are needed, what makes a government legitimate, what rights and freedoms it should protect and why, what form it should take and why, what the law is, and what duties citizens owe to a legitimate government, if any, and when it may be legitimately overthrown—if ever. In a vernacular sense, the term "political philosophy" often refers to a general view, or specific ethic, belief or attitude, about politics that does not necessarily belong to the technical discipline of philosophy.

    Political philosophy can also be understood by analysing it through the perspectives of metaphysics,epistemology and axiology thereby unearthing the ultimate reality side,the knowledge or methodical side and the value aspects of politics. Three central concerns of political philosophy have been the political economy by which property rights are defined and access to capital is regulated, the demands of justice in distribution and punishment, and the rules of truth and evidence that determine judgments in the law. Sometimes though, the law determines judgments, creating a Catch-22.
    Of course there's more than Wikipedia I can rely upon. Seriously, you do recognize the difference between ideology and social-political philosophy right?

  4. #114
    meh Salomé's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Posts
    10,540

    Default Communist feminism

    I confess, I can't be bothered to read most of this post because grey guy's arguments are too passe to take seriously.

    But, I'm interested in what the women think of this:

    "When she loved a man again, she would return to normal: a woman that is, whose sexuality would ebb and flow in response to his. A woman's sexuality is, so to speak, contained by a man, if he is a real man: she is, in a sense, put to sleep by him, she does not think about sex." - The Golden Notebook

    True or false?

    And why was Lessing considered a feminist?
    Quote Originally Posted by Ivy View Post
    Gosh, the world looks so small from up here on my high horse of menstruation.

  5. #115
    Senior Member Eileen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    MBTI
    INFJ
    Enneagram
    6?
    Posts
    2,191

    Default

    When a person would use a philosophy to exert power/dictate how someone lives her life, it becomes an ideology.
    INFJ

    "I can never be what I ought to be until you are what you ought to be. You can never be what you ought to be until I am what I ought to be. This is the interrelated structure of reality." -Martin Luther King, Jr.

  6. #116
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bluemonday View Post
    I confess, I can't be bothered to read most of this post because grey guy's arguments are too passe to take seriously.
    Truth is determined by the merits of its arguments, not by what time of day it is.

  7. #117
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post
    Granted, if one goes by the standard everyday definition of "ideology" as any body of beliefs concerning political affairs, it can be confusing.

    If we go by the original definition of ideology by Destutt de Tracy: ideologies are bodies of ideas that aim towards the total transformation of society along the lines of an abstract theory that's divorced from reality; and often based upon a more reductionist apporach to issues.

    By contrast; philosophy(in this case social and political) is based upon the critical study of the principles that underlie the right order, both personal and socially. Philosophy is not reductionist by nature, but rather acknowledges the multiplicity of reality. It's also more open-ended then ideology. Rather than aiming towards for the total transformation of the world, philosophy is more interested in providing the proper paradigms from which to address the world.

    How does this apply to this discussion? Quite alot really. I'm arguing about the basic principles of a "conservative" approach to womens' issues - namely the primacy of family duties over more public ones. As I fully acknowledged, this need not mean women staying in the home entirely, but the whatever public affairs women do must revolve around that basic principle. How this works out in reality certainly differs according to circumstances. I'm not laying out a one-size fits all approach to the issue. So Im taking the more philosophical approach.

    By contrast; it seems you, Eileen, and Ivy are taking more the ideological approach - or at the very least try to pigeonhole my views within an ideological perspective. Your sarcastic remark about how my views amount to "constitutive ideological rhetoric" for a male-dominated Capitalist society certainly shows this. If anything this is a classic example of the ideological approach.

    Even with sarcasm aside, the standard response to my arguments have been the insistence of an abstract notion of "equality" for both private and public spheres in the lives of women(and to even an extent men too). Yet as I noted, the concrete reality speaks differently on several levels.

    This goes to very much the heart of "Conservatism" as I understand it. Edmund Burke was a staunch critic of the abstract social theories of the Enlightenment, and how they played out in numerous areas of the world - most famously in France. He argued in favor of tradition precisely because it is based upon the concrete experience of countless generations; and it is utterly foolish for any one person or generation even to claim to have more understanding of the world than that - especially with the complex nature of man and society.

    This doesn't mean, as many like ajblaise argued, an absolute resistance to change. Ironically Burke himself stated, "A state without the means of some change is without the means of its conservation." Rather tradition provides the foundation for change in proper directions and proportions.

    Now as for the "equality" of public and private spheres. Well the orderings of any just(and perhaps we could add any geniunely democratic) society moves from the grassroots up. And the most basic unit that exists at the grassroots is the family. Democracy and justice cannot exist without that strong foundation, since man by nature is a social animal and needs to lives within concrete communities in order to fufill his public duties, not to mention find personal fufilment.

    As Edmund Burke himself stated:

    "We begin our public affections in families. No cold relation is the zealous citizen. We pass on to our neighborhoods and our provincial connections. These are our inns and resting places. Such division of our country as have been formed by habit and not by sudden jerk of authority are so many little images of the great country in which the heart is found something it could fill. The love to the whole is not extinguished by this subordinate partiality...To love the little platoon we belong to in society is the first principle of public affections. It is the first link in the series by which we proceed towards a love to our country and to mankind."
    So by insisting upon a blind abstract "equality" between the family and "public life", you destroy the meaning and significance of both. If you cannot care for those closest to you, you certainly cannot care for those with less connection and attachment to you in the overall society. That's why the primacy of the family is important not only to women specifically, but society in general.

    So that's by and large much of the basic points I've been trying to make within this discussion. I hope this helps clears things up a bit. And by goodness, there's still plenty more I have to address. *sigh* Oh well.
    Well then it is clear that the differences between our perspectives is based along more foundational lines. Namely, I take ideology to be the medium through which traditional power relations are maintained and crystallized. This means that I think that ideology preserves that which is NOT natural, but which it deceives us into thinking is natural. And this ideology is transmitted covertly and unconsciously through institutions such as the family to reproduce itself in subjects. (This is probably why arguments such as 'what's worked' throughout history hold no force from this perspective).

    So this, I believe, is the source of our differences. For you can see clearly that an idea such as your 'conservative feminism' (or post-feminism) would seem, from my view, to be just a reinforcement of the existing ideology (instead of an independent 'philosophical' perspective). Of course, I have my viewpoint because that is what I take to be most true to my lived experience. That doesn't mean that it's absolutely true (though as a postmodernist I wouldn't think truth has that much force with you ). But I also have no reason to believe that your perspective of what is 'right', according to your philosophy, is necessarily the right perspective. If it doesn't ring true to my lived experience, then I'm most likely to find it false.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  8. #118
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Yes Orangey, I would agree that the main difference between us is one of different paradigms - or "foundational" as you described it. Philosophy after all it the discourse between different perpsectives and paradigms.

  9. #119
    Blah Orangey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    MBTI
    ESTP
    Enneagram
    6w5
    Socionics
    SLE
    Posts
    6,364

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Peguy View Post
    Yes Orangey, I would agree that the main difference between us is one of different paradigms - or "foundational" as you described it. Philosophy after all it the discourse between different perpsective and paradigms.
    Or the continuous search for truth and knowledge.
    Artes, Scientia, Veritasiness

  10. #120
    Sniffles
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Orangey View Post
    Or the continuous search for truth and knowledge.
    Yes of course that too, but they're not mutually exclusive. In order to search for truth and knowledge, you often have to engage in discourse with people of differing perspectives in order to help achieve that end.

Similar Threads

  1. Question for conservative people
    By Virtual ghost in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 05-17-2009, 08:18 PM
  2. Conservative hypocrisy brought to you by The Daily Show.
    By Didums in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 263
    Last Post: 10-06-2008, 07:46 PM
  3. Conservative attacks on health confirmed
    By rivercrow in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 09-11-2008, 03:36 PM
  4. [MBTItm] Socially Conservative NF's?
    By Angry Ayrab in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 08-04-2008, 10:14 PM
  5. Feminism
    By GZA in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 131
    Last Post: 02-29-2008, 07:31 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