James S Saint wrote:Philosophy is about reasoning (despite the obvious lack of it on these forums).
It often entails ontology which is a subject of more interest to the masculine than the feminine.
It's critic is precision, another more masculine concern than feminine.
It is much like the game of chess.
There are evolutionary issues that kept the two genders distinct.
Removing that distinction is tampering with far, far more than social engineers can imagine.
Uccisore wrote:The only reason there aren't more women philosophers is because there's such a thing as "Women's Studies". Women were actually on the rise in philosophy until somebody decided they needed their own special rumpus-room of academia where they didn't have to deal with big words or hard questions.
Faust wrote:To generalize, women know too much. For instance, they know the meaning and origin of morality, and they also know that it would never be taken seriously by men. Morality, as a philosophical matter, is usually a monstrosity based upon maternal, life-preserving admonishments. "Don't hit your sister" becomes "thou shalt not kill" - the guilt (directed anxiety) we feel when mom's mad gets burlesqued into a "moral faculty". No one believes me when I say this, so I usually don't.
Also, men want to build. They want to design. So they design and build a garden of thought. Women understand that the main thing is to plant a few seeds and then to prune and weed. Women understand, all too well, that philosophy is largely an "eliminative" endeavor. Hume and Nietzsche knew this, but few other professional philosophers have. Better to build fictional epistemologies than to simply take out the trash from our thinking. But women know better, in the main.
Funny, you should mention chess when the queen rules the table... Once the queen is gone more then likely your king is in check.
Why wouldn't women find ontology interested when we are the reason for it. Life is not created without us.
I am not talking about shaking the foundation of male and female distinction just, why can't my ideal be as profound as
Typist wrote:Philosophy is based upon a premise that humans are rational creatures.
Ichthus wrote:Philosophy is the highest form of The Fun.
We know to much so there for we can not input? I do agree about the "moral faculty" but what i have to say about that is buck up. If a man can get denied in his advance towards women and continue even after. He can get over that hump too at a certain point.
Why are men doing all this thinking for women? Has anyone ever thought to ask, "Hey, while your making dinner for me and all the other men in this philosophical debate, What do you think about reality?"
Moreno wrote:Perhaps men wouldn't philosphize if they could have as many orgasms as women.
Faust wrote:I have no idea what this means. My point is that women are not generally as interested in philosophy as are men. I'll try bucking, whatever that means. I'll let you know how it goes. Again, no idea if this is even meant as a response to my post. It certainly has nothing to do with what I wrote.
By the way, be prepared for a lot of "battle of the sexes" stuff on this thread. It's second in popularity only to conspiracy theories around here.
Magsj wrote:The average woman is too interested in being the most attractive to men, putting other females down, bitching about each other, and generally thinking that they are better than other females to bother with philosophical matters... the female members here seem to have risen above such meaningless instincts in order to further their minds.
CN, I became interested in philosophy in high school. Moreso in my early twenties after we got Internet access. I am now almost 35 with two boys (11, almost 14) and 15 mostly happy--all in-love--years of marriage. I highly doubt you are even slightly accurate.
I'm not who u think I am, tragicomic.
Philosophy begins in wonder ~ Plato
Don't take me (too) seriously here, but it was an extension of the idea that philosophy can be mental wanking.Mo_ wrote:Moreno wrote:Perhaps men wouldn't philosphize if they could have as many orgasms as women.
Joe Schmoe wrote:Men have it easy. All they have to do is ejaculate. After that, they've free reign to think.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot]