|existentialism ° art ° poetry ° exquisite corpse ° chat ° search engine|
|( the cry ) Philosophy Discussion Board|
Posted by Spratley on Wednesday, December 04, 2002 at 19:23:54 :
In Reply to: Re: women have a very rough insight of Philosophy posted by Wordsmith on Sunday, December 01, 2002 at 19:44:58 :
: You haven't looked long enough yet. Keep searching. One must dig through much dross
: before extracting even a little gold. (A paraphrase of a saying of Heraclitus.)
Is 2100 years enough dross?
Hildegaard von Bingen
I know there are others, but let's stick with the big chunks of dross for a while.
Has the point been made yet? Sure we found some nuggets in the dross. But if there is no gender-based difference relating to philosophical inclination, the we ought to have found something nearly equal. The gold/dross analogy works when searching all of humanity for philosophers. BUt when woprking with the sebset of all philosophers, we shouldn't have to sift the dross for the gold. . . if we do have to then that suggests something rare about the women who do philosophize. Erfan was not suggesting something chauvanistic in his question. He was merely asking if tehre is something different about women that does not lend itself to philosophizing in the Western philosophical way. I think its obvious that there are far fewer women philosopher that have survived the ravages of history to be known to us. Far fewer than the men. I think its a pretty decent induction to say there is something in the gender that does not accommodate itself to philosophical distinction.
A lack of need to be recognized, ego, pride? Maybe. Circular thinking vs. Linear thinking? Maybe --western philosophy is an arrow --straight shaft leading to a final sharp point expected to do away with opposition.
Post a Followup