User Tag List

View Poll Results: Are women more irrational than men?

44. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    12 27.27%
  • No

    27 61.36%
  • Kinda-sorta

    5 11.36%
First 3456715 Last

Results 41 to 50 of 191

  1. #41
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    5w6 sx/so


    What's so great about reason and rationality in the first place?
    I think it would be better if we all went with our own inner passions to drive us on towards the great and the impossible.
    There's nothing that we can't do!

  2. #42
    reborn PeaceBaby's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    937 so/sx


    Thanks for this rational response to Marm's thread, Z.
    "Remember always that you not only have the right to be an individual, you have an obligation to be one."
    Eleanor Roosevelt

    "When people see some things as beautiful,
    other things become ugly.
    When people see some things as good,
    other things become bad."
    Lao Tzu, Tao Te Ching

  3. #43
    darkened dreams Ravenetta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    4w5 sp/sx


    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    So far, so good. (You are thinking - always a good sign.) On average, women become more proficient in approaching things emotionally, and men in approaching things rationally.

    One could certainly argue this, but one would be wrong. Greater emotional mastery will cause women to approach everything emotionally, whether or not that is the best approach. Conversely, men will tend to approach everything rationally. Each group will tend to overrely on their area of mastery/comfort.

    The real question is which group suffers more for the imbalance? Is it worse to approach emotional matters rationally, or rational matters emotionally?
    the first would be better, although it can fall short in its attempts. You are stating the memes society has established for men and women, but are these assumptions accurate? That does need to be examined.

    One hypothesis I have about women tending towards demonstrating more emotional communication (once again assuming that is the case) is that the tradition of women caring for chi,dren has required them to be able to communicate emotions and ideas more directly in some cases. Children do not have emotional regulation or empathy established and so their primary caretakers must develop communications styles to accommodate this. To care for an infant requires empathy because of their limited communication. If this is the case it does not necessarily mean that women are more emotional, but are more likely to have a communication style in which emotions are more on the surface. What do you think?

  4. #44
    No moss growing on me Giggly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    2 sx/so


    Quote Originally Posted by Poimandres View Post
    What's so great about reason and rationality in the first place?
    I think it would be better if we all went with our own inner passions to drive us on towards the great and the impossible.
    There's nothing that we can't do!

  5. #45
    Certified Sausage Smoker Elfboy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    5w4 sx/sp
    SLI None


    Quote Originally Posted by Rasofy View Post
    On average, less logical and more reasonable.
    in other words, men are more rational when left alone to get their work done, but less rational when they need to communicate, cooperate with others or come to mutual agreement?
    if that's what you're saying, I agree.

    I think that irrational men are more likely to mask their irrationality behind a bogus wall of 'logic speak', due to what society has taught them. And in a way, it incapacitates them even further, as they often buy their own bullshit and aren t aware they even have blindspots.
    I've been guilty of this a few times when I was younger
    now I just say "my intuition says this. take it or leave it". more "rational" people tend to think I'm full of shit, but eventually they come around after my intuition has been consistently right

    I would correlate rationality more with typology
    most rational: TJs, *NTPs, 1s, 3s, 5s, 6w5s Sp doms
    least rational: FJs, IFPs, 2s, 4s, Sx doms, So/Sx

    *NTPs are rational to the point that is makes them less rational (because they end up trying to justify the decisions they've already made rather than actually wanting to make the right one or take action based upon the rational decision)
    ENFP: We put the Fi in Fire
    5w4>1w9>2w1 Sx/Sp
    Papa Bear
    Motivation: Dark Worker
    Alignment: Chaotic Neutral
    Chibi Seme
    MTG Color: black/red
    Male Archtype: King/Lover
    "You are a gay version of Gambit" Speed Gavroche
    "I wish that I could be affected by any hate, but I can't, cuz I just get affected by the bank" Chamillionaire

  6. #46
    Bird of War Julius_Van_Der_Beak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    5w6 sp/so
    LII None


    Quote Originally Posted by Poimandres View Post
    What's so great about reason and rationality in the first place?
    I think it would be better if we all went with our own inner passions to drive us on towards the great and the impossible.
    It is so hard for me to not Godwin this right now.
    The gloves are off...
    The wisdom teeth fell out...
    What you on about?

    Visit my Johari:

  7. #47
    Let Go Of Your Team Zarathustra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009


    Quote Originally Posted by LeaT View Post
    A few things:

    On what basis do we define gender/sex?
    On what basis do we define rationality/irrationality?
    Last but not least, is appearing logical the same as being logical in an actual sense?
    How do we define and understand logic?

    With these questions in mind, I think it is logical to surmise that the OP says more about how he in particular sees the world and the logical biases he operates on when understanding said world, than it does about the reality he's trying to understand.
    Your questions are all fair, but your synthesis is crap.

    The point of the thread is to discuss these questions, and no particular position was given in the OP - it was merely a question.

    I get that you're new here, so you might not get that this is how I do things, but for future reference, don't try the philosophical oneupsmanship on me, especially not when the "oneupsmanship" you're attempting not only was implicit in the OP, but are issues the OP dealt with philosophically 10 years ago.

    Quote Originally Posted by Amargith View Post
    So...if I wanted to continue the drama on this forum, Id start a thread titled:

    'Are women on average more "emotionally balanced" than men?'
    God, I don't even know if that's what it ought be called.


    I'd call it "more in touch with their emotions".

    Quote Originally Posted by Amargith
    After all, society encourages women to deal with and express their emotions, whereas men are often told to keep their emotions to themselves, and ignore them instead of dealing with them properly.

    And for that matter, could one argue that women therefore have more of a shot of being actually rational, since their emotional mastery will prevent their emotions from actually interfering with the use of rationality?

    Meanwhile, men are encouraged to be more rational, one could argue that as their emotional baggage is more likely to actually affect their reasoning capabilities and encourage instead a faux-rational facade.
    As Coriolis said, one could make that argument.

    But one would be looking at a very specific part of the total picture, a part which comprises no more than ~30% of the whole.

    It's a worthwhile part to pay attention to, but don't mistake the forest for some of the trees.

    Quote Originally Posted by fia View Post
    Perhaps this counter-argument is crap?
    Perhaps it is; or perhaps it's spot on.

    Truth is, I didn't even state the counterargument(s).

    I just stated the conclusion.

    Quote Originally Posted by fia
    I am presenting hypothesis not declarations...
    Just fyi, your posts almost never read this way.

    And that's not just a subjective opinion/read on things, it's an objective analysis of the way you use language to present your arguments.

    It's also one of the primary reasons I can't stand your posts.

    Quote Originally Posted by fia
    ...and I'm willing to admit any flaws in my position if presented with reasons that it is incorrect...
    Do you really not recognize how utterly futile arguing about fundamental axioms (over the internet, no less) tends to be?

    Quote Originally Posted by fia
    ...but how you feel about it is irrelevant.
    Actually, that's not true at all, and is egregiously false if my feelings about it are based on sound reasoning.

    I'm not sure if the irony was intentional (I somewhat doubt it), but if a man were to say such a thing to a woman, you would likely be one of the first to call it gaslighting.

    Quote Originally Posted by fia
    Edit: so maybe you are giving a completely subjective, personal feeling and opinion based response to kid about ego being irrational? Because you are demonstrating what I was talking about by making it look like the opinion of your subjective self is enough to demonstrate truth?
    That's one of about three to five things I was going for.

    You clearly did not get it in its entirety, tho.
    "I trust what you are doing though…I just see it a little differently.
    I don’t see it as you stepping away from the fire. I see it as the fire directing your course.
    No matter how airy or earthy or watery you become... to many of us you will always be...a super nova."

    "Behind these gates of seeming warmth sits, loosely chained, a fierce attack dog. Perhaps not crazy, but dangerous"

  8. #48
    Its time. Cassandra's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008


    Z, use the Fe-Te translator plz

    Keep in mind that she is going to present things in a different format that might just kick your Fe-blindspot and vice versa.

  9. #49
    pathwise dependent FDG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007


    I don't fully understand the rationality of this thread, I'm afraid.
    ENTj 7-3-8 sx/sp

  10. #50
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2012


    The man's perspective and the womans perspective will never truly understand each other.

    One is not better than the other, but I shouldn't be called "sexist" for preferring my perspective and having a love/hate relationship with the feminine perspective. Likewise it's normal for women to have a love/hate relationship with men, I don't think they are "man haters" for it.

    It is just natural, the necessarry downside that come with attraction of opposites! But how boring would life be otherwise...!?

Similar Threads

  1. Are looks more important to men or women?
    By BadOctopus in forum General Psychology
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 12-28-2015, 09:09 PM
  2. Are women more reflective than men?
    By Lark in forum Philosophy and Spirituality
    Replies: 33
    Last Post: 05-04-2012, 10:02 PM
  3. [MBTItm] Are ISFPs more N-ish than INFPs?
    By Elfboy in forum The SP Arthouse (ESFP, ISFP, ESTP, ISTP)
    Replies: 54
    Last Post: 12-05-2011, 09:33 PM
  4. [MBTItm] Are NTJs more like NFPs than NTPs?
    By Elfboy in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 108
    Last Post: 06-05-2011, 12:44 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