http://www.theguardian.com/education/commentisfree/2015/mar/23/philosophy-white-men-university-courses#comment-49450919
I wish this article provided more with respect to what in many peoples minds should be an offering given to ease.
In a layman's surface approach to this topic, it seems the evolution of philosophy could be rife at times with a given self reaction and speculation with respect to civilizations past. The center of philosophical thoughts point to the inherent biases and predispositions of those civilizations, perhaps, in some way, if it is such that thoughts are not oriented at times in some highly abstracted manner. I feel at unease, for instance, speaking of the process by which thoughts are abstracted in the characteristic way that this follows some bias of gender or race, as though the circle had the orientation of a male, if it were hard in seeing something clearly phallic by design, for example, and having played a central role in the formation of some philosophical thinking. While in modern science, studies have been offered indicating predisposition of cultural/gender biases in so far as the gravity of gender in playing a role shaping predominant occupations found later in life, if it is not only by way of cultural reinforcements, problematic to this picture, it seems one might ask if not something even more inherent or intrinsic by nature which is genetics. Not all, for instance, have desire to think in certain ways, although I eschew outright the notion in proclaiming exactly what is responsible and who are intrinsically given to certain occupation. Hopefully more so in this age and any future age, only whatever biases against a woman, for instance, or an individual of any race are only less so. Personally I see great wealth in tapping the synergy of a broader population of peoples, irrespective of race and gender.
In relating this problem, it seems also asking if a notion of self similarity and social conformity defines pre occupation in thoughts, in mind. For instance, considering the mindset and culture given to likelihoods of pondering over a course of abstractions that seem less outright meaningful in a given everyday context to some in another world, gives rise to the self evidence role of environment shaping mindset. If to examine race and gender on the basis of philosophy alone, I think potentially misses the nature and role of any given contribution. Nonetheless, it is also another complex matter on the valuations appropriated by any group or body of individuals deciding what contributions need be passed to any future generation in a given civilization(s), and yes predominantly given by a body largely, one might suppose, composed of white men.
Despite incentives that may be given in preference to providing advantage, for instance, women in a given workplace, it seems over coming gender gaps are still problematic in certain occupational spheres. More so I wonder if confronted the rigors of social reinforcement are not founded at some earlier age here, in so far as gender and racial biases. Then it seems if one wanted to raise more women to be scientists, philosophers, mathematicians, for instance, I wonder if our culture needs to start at earlier ages. I wonder if focus on later academics are a bit misguided? In other words, I think that better outreach should be occurring all along. Although I wonder as to the nature of how philosophy is defined in accepting any given philosophical works, it seems another ambiguity is left in the article here, namely, in referencing the lack of contribution, whether definitions are less restricted in defining what is of importance to a given branch. "Modern Philosophy" for instance with a Google News search has yielded articles focused on Emeril Lagasse from my vantage. Of course, while it seems the subject matter of Lagasse is more on cooking, or if having fallen into an epicurean subset of philosophy, or at least more pointedly those seeking pleasure pursuits in defining meaningful existence. It seems parsing what is important, and not having been merely reformulated as restating another philosophy serving some role in passing to future generations a teaching on the matter of philosophy. No objections to Lagasse here either.
I wish this article provided more with respect to what in many peoples minds should be an offering given to ease.
In a layman's surface approach to this topic, it seems the evolution of philosophy could be rife at times with a given self reaction and speculation with respect to civilizations past. The center of philosophical thoughts point to the inherent biases and predispositions of those civilizations, perhaps, in some way, if it is such that thoughts are not oriented at times in some highly abstracted manner. I feel at unease, for instance, speaking of the process by which thoughts are abstracted in the characteristic way that this follows some bias of gender or race, as though the circle had the orientation of a male, if it were hard in seeing something clearly phallic by design, for example, and having played a central role in the formation of some philosophical thinking. While in modern science, studies have been offered indicating predisposition of cultural/gender biases in so far as the gravity of gender in playing a role shaping predominant occupations found later in life, if it is not only by way of cultural reinforcements, problematic to this picture, it seems one might ask if not something even more inherent or intrinsic by nature which is genetics. Not all, for instance, have desire to think in certain ways, although I eschew outright the notion in proclaiming exactly what is responsible and who are intrinsically given to certain occupation. Hopefully more so in this age and any future age, only whatever biases against a woman, for instance, or an individual of any race are only less so. Personally I see great wealth in tapping the synergy of a broader population of peoples, irrespective of race and gender.
In relating this problem, it seems also asking if a notion of self similarity and social conformity defines pre occupation in thoughts, in mind. For instance, considering the mindset and culture given to likelihoods of pondering over a course of abstractions that seem less outright meaningful in a given everyday context to some in another world, gives rise to the self evidence role of environment shaping mindset. If to examine race and gender on the basis of philosophy alone, I think potentially misses the nature and role of any given contribution. Nonetheless, it is also another complex matter on the valuations appropriated by any group or body of individuals deciding what contributions need be passed to any future generation in a given civilization(s), and yes predominantly given by a body largely, one might suppose, composed of white men.
Despite incentives that may be given in preference to providing advantage, for instance, women in a given workplace, it seems over coming gender gaps are still problematic in certain occupational spheres. More so I wonder if confronted the rigors of social reinforcement are not founded at some earlier age here, in so far as gender and racial biases. Then it seems if one wanted to raise more women to be scientists, philosophers, mathematicians, for instance, I wonder if our culture needs to start at earlier ages. I wonder if focus on later academics are a bit misguided? In other words, I think that better outreach should be occurring all along. Although I wonder as to the nature of how philosophy is defined in accepting any given philosophical works, it seems another ambiguity is left in the article here, namely, in referencing the lack of contribution, whether definitions are less restricted in defining what is of importance to a given branch. "Modern Philosophy" for instance with a Google News search has yielded articles focused on Emeril Lagasse from my vantage. Of course, while it seems the subject matter of Lagasse is more on cooking, or if having fallen into an epicurean subset of philosophy, or at least more pointedly those seeking pleasure pursuits in defining meaningful existence. It seems parsing what is important, and not having been merely reformulated as restating another philosophy serving some role in passing to future generations a teaching on the matter of philosophy. No objections to Lagasse here either.
No comments:
Post a Comment