Submitted by Otarih t3_11xhm9u in philosophy
Comments
Otarih OP t1_jd34aqi wrote
I wouldn't call it sexist because that is more a term on the stratum of human discourse. The idea is more that it is phallogocentric bias, in the metaphysical sense. I don't believe that the feminine-masculine dyad is reducible to sex in human beings. Thus there is a femininity inside the rock, but we wouldn't claim it has a vagina. Hope that helps.
chiefmors t1_jd39j7e wrote
I don't like mixing phalluses with philosophy of mind, but I've long suspected I'm also just not cut out for continental philosophy.
BernardJOrtcutt t1_jd3fuao wrote
Please keep in mind our first commenting rule:
> Read the Post Before You Reply
> Read/listen/watch the posted content, understand and identify the philosophical arguments given, and respond to these substantively. If you have unrelated thoughts or don't wish to read the content, please post your own thread or simply refrain from commenting. Comments which are clearly not in direct response to the posted content may be removed.
This subreddit is not in the business of one-liners, tangential anecdotes, or dank memes. Expect comment threads that break our rules to be removed. Repeated or serious violations of the subreddit rules will result in a ban.
This is a shared account that is only used for notifications. Please do not reply, as your message will go unread.
[deleted] t1_jd3qgh7 wrote
[removed]
BernardJOrtcutt t1_jd4kcep wrote
Your comment was removed for violating the following rule:
>Read the Post Before You Reply
>Read/watch/listen the posted content, understand and identify the philosophical arguments given, and respond to these substantively. If you have unrelated thoughts or don't wish to read the content, please post your own thread or simply refrain from commenting. Comments which are clearly not in direct response to the posted content may be removed.
Repeated or serious violations of the subreddit rules will result in a ban.
This is a shared account that is only used for notifications. Please do not reply, as your message will go unread.
chiefmors t1_jd31w3f wrote
This was mildly interesting until it claimed that not acknowledging rocks as entities capable of being subjects (in the same way we do brains) was sexist and because my ontology took too many cues from penises rather than vaginas.
Ah, psychoanalysis, I hope you never change.