Date of publication: 2017-08-26 10:27
While sex selective infanticide, FGM, and forced child marriage are extreme harms against female women they are also experienced by transgender men who are female and non-binary transgender females so your argument extends only partially at best. Moreover, where these practices occur being transgender is typically a death sentence so it 8767 s unclear that males with GD as a class are less oppressed than female women as a class.
8775 It 8767 s also reasonable to conclude that you aren 8767 t personally subject to
any of these practices yourself (given your evident access to education,
allusions to your nation 8767 s general superiority to the US, and your
evident greater personal investiture in the relatively minor evils of
sexist beauty marketing). 8776
Oh, now you 8767 re breaking out the obvious misogyny that I 8767 ve heard from every MRA-type. I 8767 m not oppressed enough to have an opinion, it could be worse! (Where did I focus on beauty marketing?)
On the contrary, it is precisely because the arguments against her article are ad 8775 hominem and strawman 8776 that we know Tuvel 8767 s logic is rock-solid logic, though, that is based on her premises. Of course her premises are idiotic, and that 8767 s why this kerfuffle is so entertaining to watch.
But religion can lead to excesses. The following quote from Blessed Cardinal Newman might be dismissed a hyperbole, but one has to wonder how such a statement could ever be made and made by such a thinker and to state it in anyway as a moral statement.
8775 She takes the gender-self identification as given, simply because it is
currently accepted. If you take this insanity as given, there is no
argument against racial self-identification. 8776
I think Haslanger was actually headed in an interesting direction with her analysis, and I 8767 m honestly a bit surprised that you 8767 re so hostile to the argument. She removes identity from the sphere of personal self-identification to social classing, and has been rather heavily criticized by the left for doing so. At any rate, I 8767 ll agree that the 8775 need 8776 to invalidate self-identification as a wolf is tenuous although I 8767 m less inclined to speculate as to motive.
The left as never fully come to terms with the failure of communism. After World War II, it was obvious that communism was never going to meet its promises and never provide anything like the material wealth that capitalism does. That should have been in the end of socialism and the left as an intellectual force. There was no way to rationally defend or justify it anymore. Socialism was sold as a way to material paradise and prosperity. If it can 8767 t do that, then what is the point?
He's critquing a subset of people (specifically academics of his time) who think this way. He doesn't say "science can acheive certainty" but that people who say it can (or is the only qway to) are wrong.
He was. I suppose that is why he understood them so well. If there is a fault in Orwell is is that at heart he still believed in the efficiency of top men. The problem with 6989 is that no human en devour could ever be as ruthless and efficient as Oceania. People are too mistake prone and the world is too humorous and surreal for that. The writer who understood totalitarian governments best was Kafka. Kafka, unlike Orwell, had actually lived under such a government and understood the evil, humor and absurdity of them in a way that Orwell did not.
7. I think our cortices already sit under a further superstructure forming a hierarchical inference stack quite akin to our own cortex. Its a bit ropey and thin, but its getting cross coupled quite quickly now. It is human society/culture. A shared super creates interesting identity problems.
What reason does this woman have to lie? Why would she say that if it wasn 8767 t true? Moreover, what is so unbelievable about an example of hypocrisy. Sorry but 8775 I don 8767 t want to believe this 8776 is not a convincing argument for why the author is lying and shouldn 8767 t be taken at her word.
Much as I loathe Trump beyond all measure and think there is absolutely no reason for anyone to support him, Trump supporters are hardly the only people to assume that the behaviour of their worst and dumbest opponents is representative of their typical opponent.
There are clearly differences in approaches to 8766 free speech 8767 from culture to culture, although there are also differences in which free speech stands for, and its modes and contexts of expression. Talking about culture-wide differences in attitudes to free speech won 8767 t be especially illuminating. If we disaggregate contexts and start to study specific institutions and their operations, we might learn a little more.
You have a vested interest in maintaining your faith, but I hae a vested interest in understanding what is objectively true regardless of what people believe.
Now the cynic in me says that the people who believe in the existence of 8775 philosophical gentrification 8776 are prepared to viciously attack others for the sake of a methodological monopoly on some topics and a healthy citation count, as I couldn 8767 t resist observing on Daily Nous. Add to those detractors those who are heavily invested in the identity politics camp in the current philosophy culture wars a faction that has repeatedly shown its unselfconsciously self-righteous ruthlessness, even in the face of strong evidence against their previous claims. But only a minority of the detractors can be that nasty, so we should consider the argument on its merits.