4 ms·

You seem to have a post factual philosophy. Just because some things are made up in history does not mean the whole field is without rigor, nor does it make it

by eloff 6y ago

You seem to have a post factual philosophy. Just because some things are made up in history does not mean the whole field is without rigor, nor does it make it equivalent to the counter factual nonsense coming out of gender studies. That you can find examples to the contrary does not prove the rule or make everything somehow equal.

woodruffw 6y ago
I'm sorry if it wasn't clear, but those weren't supposed to be examples to the contrary (it's a matter of historical fact that people believed those myths, and acted based on those beliefs), nor do I have a "post factual" personal philosophy (I'm actually a Rawlsian and a moral realist, which is about as stodgy and non-postmodern as you can get by moral philosophy standards). The point with that whole digression was to provide a little window into the kinds of analyses that a critical philosopher might do: they're not interested in dismantling history as a whole; they're interested in carving at the joints between phenomena that are taken for granted as conjoined. I think that's important, even if it isn't the kind of research that I personally excel at (or even understand especially well).
- eloff 6y ago
  Sorry, I didn't mean to go at you. It's just one of my buttons when people cherry pick something bad about Y and try to use that establish that X is therefore somehow equal or not worse. There are some people out there who even like to believe all humans are equal. As if they live in some alternate reality. I'm not implying anything about you by the way, just venting. Someone else in the comments here had the gall to say there are bad physics papers therefore gender studies is no less legitimate. Which is totally nonsensical as an argument. > they're interested in carving at the joints between phenomena that are taken for granted as conjoined On the surface I have no issue with that. I just think the field of gender studies in general is so toxic and full of garbage that anyone doing actual serious work in that field would do well to distance themselves from it.

by eloff 6y ago

woodruffw 6y ago

I'm sorry if it wasn't clear, but those weren't supposed to be examples to the contrary (it's a matter of historical fact that people believed those myths, and acted based on those beliefs), nor do I have a "post factual" personal philosophy (I'm actually a Rawlsian and a moral realist, which is about as stodgy and non-postmodern as you can get by moral philosophy standards). The point with that whole digression was to provide a little window into the kinds of analyses that a critical philosopher might do: they're not interested in dismantling history as a whole; they're interested in carving at the joints between phenomena that are taken for granted as conjoined. I think that's important, even if it isn't the kind of research that I personally excel at (or even understand especially well).

eloff 6y ago
Sorry, I didn't mean to go at you. It's just one of my buttons when people cherry pick something bad about Y and try to use that establish that X is therefore somehow equal or not worse. There are some people out there who even like to believe all humans are equal. As if they live in some alternate reality. I'm not implying anything about you by the way, just venting. Someone else in the comments here had the gall to say there are bad physics papers therefore gender studies is no less legitimate. Which is totally nonsensical as an argument. > they're interested in carving at the joints between phenomena that are taken for granted as conjoined On the surface I have no issue with that. I just think the field of gender studies in general is so toxic and full of garbage that anyone doing actual serious work in that field would do well to distance themselves from it.