Could feminists believe women are inferior? « Feminist Philosophers

Could feminists believe women are inferior? « Feminist Philosophers

A very interesting post! I was too indeterminate in my results so as to reveal an apparent discrimination; although I do think I’m a bit something-ist (not saying which!)

I’d like to know your results!

Sinistre x


Non-philosophers I covertly mistake as philosophers

1. Isaac Newton (Author of ‘Principia) – as a metaphysician, and methodology-setter

2. Karl Barth (Theologian) – metaphysics, politics and ethics

3. Alan Turing (Logician) – as a philosopher of mind

4. Max Weber (Sociologist) – as a philosopher of social science, social philosopher, methodologist, possibly economist, and quasi philosopher of mind

5. Richard Dawkins (Biologist) – a philosopher of science, an enlightenment proponent in the vein of Hume, Spinoza, Leibniz and Voltaire

6. Sigmund Freud (Psychoanalyst) – If Marx is a philosopher, why the hell isn’t Freud one?! They equally have a case to be called one, yet the former is deemed philosophy, and the latter, not.

I deem their thought and conclusions important to philosophy and thought provoking to philosophical categories that aren’t fully encompassed in their own subjects: the notion of complete physical theories in physics; the notion of computation in mathematics; the notion of the centrism of Christ in theology; the nature of human action in sociology; and the nature of the hidden processes of our mind in the ‘mind-sciences’ (df: psychology, psychiatry, neuroscience). Then again, I always think if people are really great, everyone wants to claim them for their own: I feel that way very much for Newton. I have been thinking of writing a post on that very subject.


Single (marital status) as the new ‘black’?

Before Michael sends (yet another) few Tarot videos, I address your eyes to this article.

 This is a bizarre article, but I think this lady may have a point. Being single is a lifestyle choice, many of my old teachers were chaste, and it was part of their holy orders. Is single-bashing the new ‘black joke’? Part of me thinks not, but the better part suspends judgement. A new area of human rights that we must protect? or, something that denigrates the rights and non-discrimination legislature already by mocking it?

You decide.


Things I hear people often complain about

These are the concerns of many I have come across:

1. Housing prices

2. People who ‘abuse’ benefits

3. ‘Yobs’ – this could be equivalent to the term ‘chavs’. I distance myself from this criticism such a grouping.

4. Eastern European economic migrants ‘taking jobs’

5. Call centres

6. Paedophiles, and

7. Children getting kidnapped causing a national panic


 I ask you this question: what narrative or social theory acknowledges all of these?