Total Posts:71|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Women Inferior to Men?

Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2015 3:31:44 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/8/2015 2:48:28 AM, Harper wrote:
I saw this post here: https://answers.yahoo.com... and I want to know what you all think about it.

Anyone who thinks that should read A Room of One's Own by Virginia Woolf. She explains it all.
AFism
Posts: 1,030
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2015 12:50:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/8/2015 2:48:28 AM, Harper wrote:
I saw this post here: https://answers.yahoo.com... and I want to know what you all think about it.

for anyone whose too lazy to click a link here:

"Of course, you have your commonly acknowledged disadvantages: allegedly lower pay, emphasis on adherence to beauty norms, menstruation, gender stereotypes, men taking you for a fool, being physically weaker, etc. But there are others that have been on my mind, most of them relating to female cognitive ability.

There are those who've concluded that females are less logical, creative, ambitious, and that there are less female geniuses. Many will point to history and say "Look, women haven't accomplished much in the sciences or humanities." The feminist explanation is both a lack of education and a lack of freedom. In rebuttal, they'll simply point out that even today, women make up a significant minority of those who've done anything noteworthy in the "hard" sciences and humanities-- and they'd be correct. That's what's getting to me, the apparent lack of female accomplishment, even in educated female populations. Why? Could it be smaller brain size? Different organization of the brain? Social factors, even? Could it be a lower "drive" to succeed, due to women having 10x less testosterone?

This topic has been killing me, and I've begun to develop an inferiority-complex because of it. I just wish I were born male. Of course, being male isn't inherently better, and it depends on your goals in life. If you want to have babies and raise them, then being female is your thing. However, if you're like me, and want a career and a name for yourself, then it's a great disadvantage."


This post saddened me and disgusted me. It's a shame that a person could hate themselves so much, but it is unfortunately understandable in this society. You're inherently damned if you aren't a rich heterosexual, cis-gendered, able-bodied, fit, white, male .

I feel as though this inferiority in cultivated in our society and justified by psuedo science. If everyone truly believes in mind over matter, why do we still have this conversation?
HououinKyouma
Posts: 1,030
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2015 2:45:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/8/2015 12:50:47 PM, AFism wrote:
At 2/8/2015 2:48:28 AM, Harper wrote:
I saw this post here: https://answers.yahoo.com... and I want to know what you all think about it.

for anyone whose too lazy to click a link here:

"Of course, you have your commonly acknowledged disadvantages: allegedly lower pay, emphasis on adherence to beauty norms, menstruation, gender stereotypes, men taking you for a fool, being physically weaker, etc. But there are others that have been on my mind, most of them relating to female cognitive ability.

There are those who've concluded that females are less logical, creative, ambitious, and that there are less female geniuses. Many will point to history and say "Look, women haven't accomplished much in the sciences or humanities." The feminist explanation is both a lack of education and a lack of freedom. In rebuttal, they'll simply point out that even today, women make up a significant minority of those who've done anything noteworthy in the "hard" sciences and humanities-- and they'd be correct. That's what's getting to me, the apparent lack of female accomplishment, even in educated female populations. Why? Could it be smaller brain size? Different organization of the brain? Social factors, even? Could it be a lower "drive" to succeed, due to women having 10x less testosterone?

This topic has been killing me, and I've begun to develop an inferiority-complex because of it. I just wish I were born male. Of course, being male isn't inherently better, and it depends on your goals in life. If you want to have babies and raise them, then being female is your thing. However, if you're like me, and want a career and a name for yourself, then it's a great disadvantage."


By the light of Apollo!

This post saddened me and disgusted me. It's a shame that a person could hate themselves so much, but it is unfortunately understandable in this society. You're inherently damned if you aren't a rich heterosexual, cis-gendered, able-bodied, fit, white, male .

I think that you are exaggerating a tad.

I feel as though this inferiority in cultivated in our society and justified by psuedo science. If everyone truly believes in mind over matter, why do we still have this conversation?

We still have this conversation because there are enough stupid people out there who force us to have it.
"Here the ways of men part: if you wish to strive for peace of soul and pleasure, then believe; if you wish to be a devotee of truth, then inquire." F. Nietzsche.

"Freedom is always freedom for the one who thinks differently." R. Luxemburg.

"The principle of the masochistic left is that, in general, two blacks make a white, half a loaf is the same as no bread." G. Orwell, paraphrase.

"Islamophobia is a word created by fascists, used by cowards, to manipulate morons". Andrew Cummins.
Harper
Posts: 374
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/8/2015 6:02:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/8/2015 12:50:47 PM, AFism wrote:
At 2/8/2015 2:48:28 AM, Harper wrote:
I saw this post here: https://answers.yahoo.com... and I want to know what you all think about it.

for anyone whose too lazy to click a link here:

"Of course, you have your commonly acknowledged disadvantages: allegedly lower pay, emphasis on adherence to beauty norms, menstruation, gender stereotypes, men taking you for a fool, being physically weaker, etc. But there are others that have been on my mind, most of them relating to female cognitive ability.

There are those who've concluded that females are less logical, creative, ambitious, and that there are less female geniuses. Many will point to history and say "Look, women haven't accomplished much in the sciences or humanities." The feminist explanation is both a lack of education and a lack of freedom. In rebuttal, they'll simply point out that even today, women make up a significant minority of those who've done anything noteworthy in the "hard" sciences and humanities-- and they'd be correct. That's what's getting to me, the apparent lack of female accomplishment, even in educated female populations. Why? Could it be smaller brain size? Different organization of the brain? Social factors, even? Could it be a lower "drive" to succeed, due to women having 10x less testosterone?

This topic has been killing me, and I've begun to develop an inferiority-complex because of it. I just wish I were born male. Of course, being male isn't inherently better, and it depends on your goals in life. If you want to have babies and raise them, then being female is your thing. However, if you're like me, and want a career and a name for yourself, then it's a great disadvantage."


This post saddened me and disgusted me. It's a shame that a person could hate themselves so much, but it is unfortunately understandable in this society. You're inherently damned if you aren't a rich heterosexual, cis-gendered, able-bodied, fit, white, male .

Yeah, it is quite sad.

I feel as though this inferiority in cultivated in our society and justified by psuedo science. If everyone truly believes in mind over matter, why do we still have this conversation?
Though I don't know if it's justified by pseudo-science and mind over matter is still not well established in the scientific community (many scientific findings pointing to biological determinism). Humans are a sexually dimorphic species, and there exists evidence that males and females do exhibit different mental abilities. Of course, things like cognitive ability are subject to change not only through environment, but also through evolutionary processes. So even if she's right, there's still room for change.
RaceRealist
Posts: 26
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 9:24:54 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
She's right. Women are inferior to men for the most part. The Sciences are dominated by males, any management position is usually male dominated. Women are typically the secretaries and are in social fields like teaching or day care. I'm so glad i was born male
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 12:51:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
The Fool: Woman are not inferior to men, even evolutionary wise, it wouldn't make sense for reciprocated sexes to develop behaviors to be somehow inferior to the behaviors of another sex. It just doesn't make any sense. In regards to IQ, men tend to be the smartest, and the dumbest, that is the range of intelligence between men varies more than it does for women. Women tend to cluster more in the middle, that is, there tends to be less woman geniuses, but there are also less at the lower ends, of the spectrum.

But the average intelligence of women as a whole, and the average intelligence of men as a whole, is about the very same.
http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com...

Types of Intelligence
From what I remember, men tend to do a little better in regards to mathematics, geometry, and dry logic, while women tend to do better with language skills. That is, men tend to excel a little more at abstract reasoning, while women tend to excel at social reasoning.
https://www.psychologytoday.com...

Regression physical Strength
Man tend to be stronger in general physically, but women tend to have stronger immune systems.

Personality
In regard to types of personality men and women are generally complementary, not necessarily better or worse. Men tend to lean towards objectivity, while women tend to lean toward subjectivity.

Overlapping Traits
There is for the most part always overlap, so there is only a small handful of a particular gender, or sex who are above that of a whole another gender or sex in a particular area. Because the variance with in groups, is larger than the variance between groups, it is still best that everybody be given equal opportunity to demonstrate their abilities, for any particular skill.

Conclusion
The truth is, because it's so controversial, that is, because it goes against the reigning ideology for there to be no significant differences, it is very hard to see what are the actual differences. Because any study or test which shows too much of a difference, will be challenged, scrutinized, and manipulated so that the scores do not show a significant difference.

Against The Ideologist

Fool forever....
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Harper
Posts: 374
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 1:12:32 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/10/2015 9:24:54 AM, RaceRealist wrote:
She's right. Women are inferior to men for the most part. The Sciences are dominated by males, any management position is usually male dominated. Women are typically the secretaries and are in social fields like teaching or day care. I'm so glad i was born male

You are right for the most part; the sciences are dominated by males, though if you were to look at the statistics over time, there is a growing trend for women going into science and for women winning Nobel Prizes for work in those fields. So I don't think that the disparity is due to a gap in ability. With that being said, I'm still not entirely convinced that the ratio of males to females in science will be 1:1, given the fact that women, like you indicated, historically have and still do prefer social work (child raising, education, sociology, etc.) to more abstract subjects like physics, for instance. Female preference for social work is in line with modern day psychological findings: a woman's concerns is with the survival of the group. A woman is generally more concerned with the whole rather than the individual, which, aside from explaining female career choices, could also explain the female tendency for liberalism.

With regards to women being executives/CEO's of a company: again, you're right, but there is still a similar trend upwards for the number of women in these jobs, though women still make up a significant minority. This could be due to lower testosterone levels (testosterone is an androgen (male hormone) that is responsible for aggressive and competitive behavior under stress.), though that doesn't entirely convince me. Why? Because like I've already noted, women are tied to the survival of the group and do display comparable competitive drive when faced with a situation that threatens the group while males tend to act more selfishly in competitive situations. So on one hand, it would only make sense for the group oriented women to succeed in managing businesses, but on the other hand, the business world requires you to be incredibly aggressive to get to that management position, which could explain why males tend to hold more of those positions.

Now, while you are free to be happy to have been born male, I don't think it's much of an "upgrade"-- for example, males live more dangerous and shorter lives, are more susceptible to dysfunctions such as autism, more likely to commit suicide, more likely to be homeless, are the ones forcibly drafted into militaries, and are more likely to be extremely aggressive (and violently so). Either way you make a trade off. I just think that people should be content with what they cannot change and simply do their best with what they have.
Harper
Posts: 374
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 1:41:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/10/2015 12:51:54 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
The Fool: Woman are not inferior to men, even evolutionary wise, it wouldn't make sense for reciprocated sexes to develop behaviors to be somehow inferior to the behaviors of another sex. It just doesn't make any sense. In regards to IQ, men tend to be the smartest, and the dumbest, that is the range of intelligence between men varies more than it does for women. Women tend to cluster more in the middle, that is, there tends to be less woman geniuses, but there are also less at the lower ends, of the spectrum.

Agreed, though that variance could be turned around to support her argument. If there will always be more male geniuses, and those who are at the top of their respective branch of knowledge are all geniuses, then one would expect less famous female scientists and less incredibly accomplished females, even after environment and upbringing are accounted for. That, I imagine, can be very discouraging for ambitious females.

An interesting factor to consider, however, is selection pressure. Males have more IQ variance because men had to compete more vigorously than females in order to pass on genes. With that being said, one can imagine that if males put just as much of a selection pressure onto females for intelligence, that the rate of variance will be similar to that in males (resulting in more female geniuses). Evolution does provide an open door for change (given, of course, that the species has adequate evolvability).

But the average intelligence of women as a whole, and the average intelligence of men as a whole, is about the very same.
http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com...

That is correct. A really curious trend noted by James Flynn (responsible for the discovery of the Flynn Effect) concerning IQ and the sexes is that female IQ is increasing more rapidly than male IQ. He theorizes that this is not a result of females literally becoming more intelligent, but a result of the female mind's ability to adapt to the modern world.

Types of Intelligence
From what I remember, men tend to do a little better in regards to mathematics, geometry, and dry logic, while women tend to do better with language skills. That is, men tend to excel a little more at abstract reasoning, while women tend to excel at social reasoning.
https://www.psychologytoday.com...

That is true, and there are studies that show that the difference in mathematical performance is variable from one country to another (women and men in first world countries have lower gaps in mathematical ability than in third world countries), hinting that the difference in ability may be due more to environment than to genetic sex. Though, I wonder how much of an effect genetic sex has on mathematical ability; could it be that even after taking environment into account (creating a society that actually expects women to do well in math) that men will still have a slight advantage? It could be, but like I said, genes change, too.

Regression physical Strength
Man tend to be stronger in general physically, but women tend to have stronger immune systems.

Personality
In regard to types of personality men and women are generally complementary, not necessarily better or worse. Men tend to lean towards objectivity, while women tend to lean toward subjectivity.

I don't think that's an adequate way of describing the differences in personality (do you have a study that can support that claim, because that's the first time I've heard it?). I think the most accurate way is to say that males tend to be more aggressive and self oriented while females tend to be more docile and group oriented. None of these traits are "bad" or "inferior", they simply differ (and even then, only generally, there are definitely women who are more self oriented and men who are more gentle; and there's nothing wrong with that, either.)

Overlapping Traits
There is for the most part always overlap, so there is only a small handful of a particular gender, or sex who are above that of a whole another gender or sex in a particular area. Because the variance with in groups, is larger than the variance between groups, it is still best that everybody be given equal opportunity to demonstrate their abilities, for any particular skill.

Agreed 100% Although one could argue that the cultural implications for these general behaviors could necessitate certain social arrangements in society.

Conclusion
The truth is, because it's so controversial, that is, because it goes against the reigning ideology for there to be no significant differences, it is very hard to see what are the actual differences. Because any study or test which shows too much of a difference, will be challenged, scrutinized, and manipulated so that the scores do not show a significant difference.

Yes, even academics tend to shy away from any data showing differences between the sexes or the races. This is why a political correct culture (at least in academia) should be shunned; the truth, whatever it is or however repulsive it may be, must be sought out.

Against The Ideologist

Fool forever....

The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 2:42:42 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Harping On Intellectual Differences

The Fool: Woman are not inferior to men, even evolutionary wise, it wouldn't make sense for reciprocated sexes to develop behaviors to be somehow inferior to the behaviors of another sex. It just doesn't make any sense. In regards to IQ, men tend to be the smartest, and the dumbest, that is the range of intelligence between men varies more than it does for women. Women tend to cluster more in the middle, that is, there tends to be less woman geniuses, but there are also less at the lower ends, of the spectrum.

Harper : Agreed, though that variance could be turned around to support her argument. If there will always be more male geniuses, and those who are at the top of their respective branch of knowledge are all geniuses, then one would expect less famous female scientists and less incredibly accomplished females, even after environment and upbringing are accounted for. That, I imagine, can be very discouraging for ambitious females.

The Fool: The fact that there is more, doesn't mean that there is none, it just means that it's less likely, but I mean that's not how you should live life. I don't think as a black person, I better not do philosophy because there are hardly any black philosophers, as of yet. For all we know it's a troll anyways. That is, an over egotistic male, posing the question insincerely.

Harper :: An interesting factor to consider, however, is selection pressure. Males have more IQ variance because men had to compete more vigorously than females in order to pass on genes. With that being said, one can imagine that if males put just as much of a selection pressure onto females for intelligence, that the rate of variance will be similar to that in males (resulting in more female geniuses). Evolution does provide an open door for change (given, of course, that the species has adequate evolvability).

The Fool: You are sounding a little MGTOW here. However, the genes, are passed on to the males and females alike. It's testosterone creates a different gene expression, but the selection process makes both men and women smarter . Overall.
http://www.debate.org...

But the average intelligence of women as a whole, and the average intelligence of men as a whole, is about the very same.
http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com...

Harper: That is correct. A really curious trend noted by James Flynn (responsible for the discovery of the Flynn Effect) concerning IQ and the sexes is that female IQ is increasing more rapidly than male IQ. He theorizes that this is not a result of females literally becoming more intelligent, but a result of the female mind's ability to adapt to the modern world.

The Fool: It's hard to tell because, the schools have since then changed to cater females to increase the their performance at the neglect of males, and learning it does have a significant effect on your IQ. Moreover, the IQ test have been manipulated in order to show less of a significant difference between genders. The current environment, that is the feminist academic environment is more likely to allow IQ tests to show that women are superior then it would allow for men to show any superiority, as to support the ideology, that everything is a matter of social conditioning.

e.g.
One way to have done this is that Factors where women have previously scored poorly on, particularly math, get reduced, and factors they do well on, have an increase score for how much they account for the overall test score. This is also been done to show less of the discrepancy between races.


Against The Ideologist


(to be continued)
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
jimtimmy4
Posts: 321
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 2:46:01 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/8/2015 12:50:47 PM, AFism wrote:
At 2/8/2015 2:48:28 AM, Harper wrote:
I saw this post here: https://answers.yahoo.com... and I want to know what you all think about it.

for anyone whose too lazy to click a link here:

"Of course, you have your commonly acknowledged disadvantages: allegedly lower pay, emphasis on adherence to beauty norms, menstruation, gender stereotypes, men taking you for a fool, being physically weaker, etc. But there are others that have been on my mind, most of them relating to female cognitive ability.

There are those who've concluded that females are less logical, creative, ambitious, and that there are less female geniuses. Many will point to history and say "Look, women haven't accomplished much in the sciences or humanities." The feminist explanation is both a lack of education and a lack of freedom. In rebuttal, they'll simply point out that even today, women make up a significant minority of those who've done anything noteworthy in the "hard" sciences and humanities-- and they'd be correct. That's what's getting to me, the apparent lack of female accomplishment, even in educated female populations. Why? Could it be smaller brain size? Different organization of the brain? Social factors, even? Could it be a lower "drive" to succeed, due to women having 10x less testosterone?

This topic has been killing me, and I've begun to develop an inferiority-complex because of it. I just wish I were born male. Of course, being male isn't inherently better, and it depends on your goals in life. If you want to have babies and raise them, then being female is your thing. However, if you're like me, and want a career and a name for yourself, then it's a great disadvantage."


This post saddened me and disgusted me. It's a shame that a person could hate themselves so much, but it is unfortunately understandable in this society. You're inherently damned if you aren't a rich heterosexual, cis-gendered, able-bodied, fit, white, male .

I feel as though this inferiority in cultivated in our society and justified by psuedo science. If everyone truly believes in mind over matter, why do we still have this conversation?

Ya. Except what you call "pseudo science" is really "real science that concludes things i don't like"
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 2:58:18 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Harping On Intellectual Differences
Part 2

Types of Intelligence
Harper : From what I remember, men tend to do a little better in regards to mathematics, geometry, and dry logic, while women tend to do better with language skills. That is, men tend to excel a little more at abstract reasoning, while women tend to excel at social reasoning.
https://www.psychologytoday.com...


Harper:: That is true, and there are studies that show that the difference in mathematical performance is variable from one country to another (women and men in first world countries have lower gaps in mathematical ability than in third world countries), hinting that the difference in ability may be due more to environment than to genetic sex. Though, I wonder how much of an effect genetic sex has on mathematical ability; could it be that even after taking environment into account (creating a society that actually expects women to do well in math) that men will still have a slight advantage? It could be, but like I said, genes change, too.

The Fool: Study that do show that, are very sketchy at best. They tend to say something like, the scores differ if someone before the class says that "women are likely to perform less on mathematics". From what I know these studies have never been replicated, but have been generalized allotted.. This apparently is also the same with blacks, that is, if somebody says blacks tend to do less at this test, the performance tends to suffer. I haven't gone through the studies myself. But I know that because of the reigning ideology, social science is easily influenced in a way that compromises objective integrity.

Personality
The Fool: : In regard to types of personality men and women are generally complementary, not necessarily better or worse. Men tend to lean towards objectivity, while women tend to lean toward subjectivity.

Harper::: I don't think that's an adequate way of describing the differences in personality (do you have a study that can support that claim, because that's the first time I've heard it?).

The Fool:, it's not meant to be a kind of sufficient explanation, but was rather an extra bit of information I had written out of context, which I subtitled under personality when editing.. The objectivit, versus subjectivity, is a general trend we see in the way that men and women and tend to use language explain to the world. I base this off an experiment of one of my professors in psychology, and the general history of literature and approaches in philosophy by men and women. I believe that personality itself, is quite complex and even the best social science experiments are problematic when it comes to personality..

Against The Ideologist

And crescendo""
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 3:07:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Jimmytimmy: "Ya. Except what you call "pseudo science" is really "real science that concludes things i don't like""

The Fool: If it doesn't agree with feminist theory, it must not be true....
<(8D)

Against The Ideologist

I'm joking but it's not really funny really.... because they really do that..
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Harper
Posts: 374
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 6:10:48 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/10/2015 2:42:42 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
Harping On Intellectual Differences

The Fool: Woman are not inferior to men, even evolutionary wise, it wouldn't make sense for reciprocated sexes to develop behaviors to be somehow inferior to the behaviors of another sex. It just doesn't make any sense. In regards to IQ, men tend to be the smartest, and the dumbest, that is the range of intelligence between men varies more than it does for women. Women tend to cluster more in the middle, that is, there tends to be less woman geniuses, but there are also less at the lower ends, of the spectrum.

Harper : Agreed, though that variance could be turned around to support her argument. If there will always be more male geniuses, and those who are at the top of their respective branch of knowledge are all geniuses, then one would expect less famous female scientists and less incredibly accomplished females, even after environment and upbringing are accounted for. That, I imagine, can be very discouraging for ambitious females.

The Fool: The fact that there is more, doesn't mean that there is none, it just means that it's less likely, but I mean that's not how you should live life. I don't think as a black person, I better not do philosophy because there are hardly any black philosophers, as of yet. For all we know it's a troll anyways. That is, an over egotistic male, posing the question insincerely.

Good point.

Harper :: An interesting factor to consider, however, is selection pressure. Males have more IQ variance because men had to compete more vigorously than females in order to pass on genes. With that being said, one can imagine that if males put just as much of a selection pressure onto females for intelligence, that the rate of variance will be similar to that in males (resulting in more female geniuses). Evolution does provide an open door for change (given, of course, that the species has adequate evolvability).

The Fool: You are sounding a little MGTOW here. However, the genes, are passed on to the males and females alike. It's testosterone creates a different gene expression, but the selection process makes both men and women smarter . Overall.
http://www.debate.org...

Another good point. Though, there are sex-linked traits, so it's not exactly far-fetched to hypothesize that there could be genes that affect intelligence on sex chromosomes.

But the average intelligence of women as a whole, and the average intelligence of men as a whole, is about the very same.
http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com...

Harper: That is correct. A really curious trend noted by James Flynn (responsible for the discovery of the Flynn Effect) concerning IQ and the sexes is that female IQ is increasing more rapidly than male IQ. He theorizes that this is not a result of females literally becoming more intelligent, but a result of the female mind's ability to adapt to the modern world.

The Fool: It's hard to tell because, the schools have since then changed to cater females to increase the their performance at the neglect of males, and learning it does have a significant effect on your IQ. Moreover, the IQ test have been manipulated in order to show less of a significant difference between genders. The current environment, that is the feminist academic environment is more likely to allow IQ tests to show that women are superior then it would allow for men to show any superiority, as to support the ideology, that everything is a matter of social conditioning.

e.g.
One way to have done this is that Factors where women have previously scored poorly on, particularly math, get reduced, and factors they do well on, have an increase score for how much they account for the overall test score. This is also been done to show less of the discrepancy between races.

This is the tricky thing with IQ tests, they are rarely unbiased one way or another.


Against The Ideologist



(to be continued)
Harper
Posts: 374
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 6:12:41 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/10/2015 2:58:18 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
Harping On Intellectual Differences
Part 2

Types of Intelligence
Harper : From what I remember, men tend to do a little better in regards to mathematics, geometry, and dry logic, while women tend to do better with language skills. That is, men tend to excel a little more at abstract reasoning, while women tend to excel at social reasoning.
https://www.psychologytoday.com...


Harper:: That is true, and there are studies that show that the difference in mathematical performance is variable from one country to another (women and men in first world countries have lower gaps in mathematical ability than in third world countries), hinting that the difference in ability may be due more to environment than to genetic sex. Though, I wonder how much of an effect genetic sex has on mathematical ability; could it be that even after taking environment into account (creating a society that actually expects women to do well in math) that men will still have a slight advantage? It could be, but like I said, genes change, too.

The Fool: Study that do show that, are very sketchy at best. They tend to say something like, the scores differ if someone before the class says that "women are likely to perform less on mathematics". From what I know these studies have never been replicated, but have been generalized allotted.. This apparently is also the same with blacks, that is, if somebody says blacks tend to do less at this test, the performance tends to suffer. I haven't gone through the studies myself. But I know that because of the reigning ideology, social science is easily influenced in a way that compromises objective integrity.

Then more investigation on my part is warranted; I'll try to find these studies and review them.

Personality
The Fool: : In regard to types of personality men and women are generally complementary, not necessarily better or worse. Men tend to lean towards objectivity, while women tend to lean toward subjectivity.

Harper::: I don't think that's an adequate way of describing the differences in personality (do you have a study that can support that claim, because that's the first time I've heard it?).

The Fool:, it's not meant to be a kind of sufficient explanation, but was rather an extra bit of information I had written out of context, which I subtitled under personality when editing.. The objectivit, versus subjectivity, is a general trend we see in the way that men and women and tend to use language explain to the world. I base this off an experiment of one of my professors in psychology, and the general history of literature and approaches in philosophy by men and women. I believe that personality itself, is quite complex and even the best social science experiments are problematic when it comes to personality..

Fair enough.
Against The Ideologist

And crescendo""
Such
Posts: 1,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 7:13:26 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/8/2015 2:45:57 PM, HououinKyouma wrote:
At 2/8/2015 12:50:47 PM, AFism wrote:
At 2/8/2015 2:48:28 AM, Harper wrote:
I saw this post here: https://answers.yahoo.com... and I want to know what you all think about it.

for anyone whose too lazy to click a link here:

"Of course, you have your commonly acknowledged disadvantages: allegedly lower pay, emphasis on adherence to beauty norms, menstruation, gender stereotypes, men taking you for a fool, being physically weaker, etc. But there are others that have been on my mind, most of them relating to female cognitive ability.

There are those who've concluded that females are less logical, creative, ambitious, and that there are less female geniuses. Many will point to history and say "Look, women haven't accomplished much in the sciences or humanities." The feminist explanation is both a lack of education and a lack of freedom. In rebuttal, they'll simply point out that even today, women make up a significant minority of those who've done anything noteworthy in the "hard" sciences and humanities-- and they'd be correct. That's what's getting to me, the apparent lack of female accomplishment, even in educated female populations. Why? Could it be smaller brain size? Different organization of the brain? Social factors, even? Could it be a lower "drive" to succeed, due to women having 10x less testosterone?

This topic has been killing me, and I've begun to develop an inferiority-complex because of it. I just wish I were born male. Of course, being male isn't inherently better, and it depends on your goals in life. If you want to have babies and raise them, then being female is your thing. However, if you're like me, and want a career and a name for yourself, then it's a great disadvantage."


By the light of Apollo!

This post saddened me and disgusted me. It's a shame that a person could hate themselves so much, but it is unfortunately understandable in this society. You're inherently damned if you aren't a rich heterosexual, cis-gendered, able-bodied, fit, white, male .

I think that you are exaggerating a tad.

Why? Because, he didn't say, "...or Asian"?

I feel as though this inferiority in cultivated in our society and justified by psuedo science. If everyone truly believes in mind over matter, why do we still have this conversation?

We still have this conversation because there are enough stupid people out there who force us to have it.

How can someone force your hand in discussing something when it's your mind that has ultimate control over their material existence as it pertains to you?

Quandaries and continuums...
Otokage
Posts: 2,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 7:14:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Still waiting to see you guys present a study in which genes responsible for ie intelligence have been figured out, and have been succesfuly correlated to the X gen, in order to conclude there's a biological distinction between males and females regarding intelligence.

If not, you guys are simply talking about two groups, gender aside, that face different treatment and opportunities on society, and thus can perform differently in tests due to social factors, eclipsing the biological influence over the characters studied.
Such
Posts: 1,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 7:16:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/10/2015 7:14:07 PM, Otokage wrote:
Still waiting to see you guys present a study in which genes responsible for ie intelligence have been figured out, and have been succesfuly correlated to the X gen, in order to conclude there's a biological distinction between males and females regarding intelligence.

If not, you guys are simply talking about two groups, gender aside, that face different treatment and opportunities on society, and thus can perform differently in tests due to social factors, eclipsing the biological influence over the characters studied.

Oh, you. Just stop it. You make me all giggly all over.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 7:38:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/10/2015 7:14:07 PM, Otokage wrote:
Otokage : Still waiting to see you guys present a study in which genes responsible for ie intelligence have been figured out, and have been succesfuly correlated to the X gen, in order to conclude there's a biological distinction between males and females regarding intelligence.


If not, you guys are simply talking about two groups, gender aside, that face different treatment and opportunities on society, and thus can perform differently in tests due to social factors, eclipsing the biological influence over the characters studied.

The Fool: What are you smoking? This doesn't make any sense...
<(8D)
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 7:40:39 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/10/2015 7:14:07 PM, Otokage wrote:
http://www.debate.org...
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 7:44:09 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Such: Oh, you. Just stop it. You make me all giggly all over.

The Fool: What are you giggling to yourself about?

Against The Ideologist

You guys are creepy...
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Such
Posts: 1,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 7:46:13 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/10/2015 7:44:09 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
Such: Oh, you. Just stop it. You make me all giggly all over.

The Fool: What are you giggling to yourself about?

Against The Ideologist

You guys are creepy...

Put your peanut butter and jealous sandwich down. Don't feel left out. His input was just perfect, and perfection gives me the tingles.

I mean, no homo, but whatever, I have nothing to prove.
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 7:49:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/10/2015 7:38:16 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 2/10/2015 7:14:07 PM, Otokage wrote:
Otokage : Still waiting to see you guys present a study in which genes responsible for ie intelligence have been figured out, and have been succesfuly correlated to the X gen, in order to conclude there's a biological distinction between males and females regarding intelligence.

The Fool: This is nonsense, we know that the variance in intelligence, is about 70% genetics. And we know that males and females score differently on different aspects of the intelligence test, and it"s is pretty unanimous that men have a flatter Bell curve, while females curve has a higher peak in the middle.

Against The Ideologist


Stick to feminist biology
<(8D)
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 7:50:06 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/10/2015 7:46:13 PM, Such wrote:
Such: Put your peanut butter and jealous sandwich down. Don't feel left out. His input was just perfect, and perfection gives me the tingles.

The Fool: It didn't make any sense...he doesn't know is talking about..
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 7:52:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/10/2015 7:46:13 PM, Such wrote:
The Fool:: that is, it's creepy that he didn't make any sense, and you're still got tingly. That's the problem. It's completely irrational.

Do you really think what he said here made sense?
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 7:53:14 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/10/2015 7:14:07 PM, Otokage wrote:
The Fool: I think you are in the wrong section.

Here's your section.
http://www.debate.org...
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
The_Fool_on_the_hill
Posts: 6,071
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 7:54:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/10/2015 7:14:07 PM, Otokage wrote:
The Fool: mwahahaha!!..
<(XD)
"The bud disappears when the blossom breaks through, and we might say that the former is refuted by the latter; in the same way when the fruit comes, the blossom may be explained to be a false form of the plant's existence, for the fruit appears as its true nature in place of the blossom. These stages are not merely differentiated; they supplant one another as being incompatible with one another." G. W. F. HEGEL
Such
Posts: 1,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 7:59:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/10/2015 7:50:06 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
At 2/10/2015 7:46:13 PM, Such wrote:
Such: Put your peanut butter and jealous sandwich down. Don't feel left out. His input was just perfect, and perfection gives me the tingles.

The Fool: It didn't make any sense...he doesn't know is talking about..

You sure?

Because, what you' meant to say is that intelligence appears approximately 70 percent inheritable, which can suggest genetic influence, but also socioeconomic and parenting influences. Nonetheless, although so many genes related to so many human characteristics have been isolated, intelligence isn't one of them, and neither brain size nor brain density can account for the dearth of information regarding genetic potential.

Therefore, the degree to which genetic potential ends and external influences, like parenting, social experiences, diet, intellectual resources, quality of education, and other factors, remains nebulous. Therefore, it's impossible to determine whether what we're seeing in differences in IQ is the same difference we see in the difference in SAT score between a poor kid with anxiety, a middle-class child with ADHD, and a rich kid of sound mind and body, all educational backgrounds equal and personal backgrounds conflicting.

In essence, what he said made perfect sense; it was a brilliant soliloquy presented in minimal words; an essay of the wrongs of contemporary intelligence logic in poetry form.

And I loved it. I fvcking loved it, and I said so, perceptions be damned.
Otokage
Posts: 2,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 8:00:00 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/10/2015 7:46:13 PM, Such wrote:
At 2/10/2015 7:44:09 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
Such: Oh, you. Just stop it. You make me all giggly all over.

The Fool: What are you giggling to yourself about?

Against The Ideologist

You guys are creepy...

Put your peanut butter and jealous sandwich down. Don't feel left out. His input was just perfect, and perfection gives me the tingles.

Thanks. I'm really good at tickling, let me give another taste-

I mean, no homo

Oh... :(
Such
Posts: 1,110
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
2/10/2015 8:16:22 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 2/10/2015 8:00:00 PM, Otokage wrote:
At 2/10/2015 7:46:13 PM, Such wrote:
At 2/10/2015 7:44:09 PM, The_Fool_on_the_hill wrote:
Such: Oh, you. Just stop it. You make me all giggly all over.

The Fool: What are you giggling to yourself about?

Against The Ideologist

You guys are creepy...

Put your peanut butter and jealous sandwich down. Don't feel left out. His input was just perfect, and perfection gives me the tingles.

Thanks. I'm really good at tickling, let me give another taste-

I mean, no homo

Oh... :(

No no no... it's okay. http://www.walldesk-hd.com...

;)

No homo.