EdEarl
-
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by EdEarl
-
-
-
-
Much of Puerto Rico has been without power for four months, and many of its citizens have relocated to the US, especially Florida. The Kotch brothers are funding a little aid for these displaced people to provide essentials, including English lessons. Seems odd, considering they think medicare expenditures are wasted, IIRC.
-
-
-
-
Just now, Raider5678 said:
Just to be clear on a few things before I continue on.
I don't think women are dumber than men. Actually, I think the contrary for generalization.
I agree women should vote and have equal rights and all that other stuff.
I'm just wondering if the argument that women should be put to the same standards as men, especially in teenagers, is starting to push it.
I think generalizations can be trouble, regardless of how much we need them. The most ethical way to interact is to treat each person as an individual who has various likes, dislikes and needs.
-
4 minutes ago, swansont said:
This distinction is not as clear-cut as you might think it is, or might want it to be. That's probably a discussion to be had in the biology section.
The answer to the thread title, "Is it ethical to view men and women as different?" is YES; although, there are many scenarios in which men and women are viewed as equals.
-
-
Quote
Wikipedia: Human Genetic Variation
No two humans are genetically identical. On average, in terms of DNA sequence, each human is 99.5% similar to any other human.
This article ignores the differences in the sexes. Men and women are not 99.5% different, but closer to 96% different, or about the same as between humans and chimpanzees. This difference is medically important, because men and women suffer from different conditions and ailments. For example:
QuoteAside from the fact that 60% of all Alzheimer’s caregivers are women, at the age of 65, women have a 1 in 6 chance of developing Alzheimer’s, compared to a 1 in 11 chance for men.
Alzheimer's isn't the only one, there are many such differences. Sex differences are in every cell of women (XX) and men (XY), not just in sexual organs. Personally, I love these differences; have been married for over 30 years.
YES men and women are different, and it is necessary and ethically just to act differently with men and women. However, there are limits. Traditionally, women have been denied rights and justice. For example, women have been considered property of men, and some still are. That in my opinion is not ethically just, in general, but if a woman knowingly and willingly marries a man who treats his wife as property, then so be it. If I criticized, both would tell me to get lost--none of my business.
In my opinion, there is no simple answer to the OP.
-
VIcente Fox is Running for President of the USA.
It's almost 6 mins of video on youtube, starring Vicente Fox, President of Mexico.
-
-
-
-
Edited by EdEarl
Today I learned that a tyrannosaurus rex called Sue (although I doubt that was her name whilst alive) probably suffered from gout.
Poor thing, she should have eaten less meat and watched her weight.
Today I learned that Jeff Bezos (Amazon CEO) is spending a $B per year to put a base on the moon built by robots.
-
The smallest brain I've heard of is in a fairywasp, which IIRC has about 100,000 neurons and the nucleus shrink as it matures. These are the smallest of insects, being the size of a large amoeba.
-
I learned that practicing mindfulness meditation can be done for only one breath; simply focus on taking a deep breath of air and exhaling. Repeat throughout the day, every day. Ref: GoogleTechTalk on youtube, Cognitive Neuroscience of Mindfulness Meditation. The speaker, Philippe Goldin PhD, is an associate professor at UC Davis School of Nursing. His postdoc work studied attention, mindfulness and brain systems, including the effects of mindfulness meditation on brain activity and plasticity.
-
-
-
Did you mean that philosophy needs established facts? If yes then I agree with you.
Example: The ancient Greeks, including Aristotle, looked around and decided the elements were earth, air, water and fire, which people believed until after the scientific revolution. No progress was made for over a thousand years, because philosophy without science is inept for some issues, including the quest for knowledge about the elements. On the other hand, "Cogito ergo sum," is an example of pure philosophy that may never be improved by science, which seems to be inept on this issue.
"Did you mean that philosophy needs established facts?" I don't know. Did the Greeks have facts to conclude the elements were Earth, Air, Water and Fire? I think Cogito ergo sum is based on facts.
-
Under the scientific method as conceived in the 17th century, natural and artificial circumstances were set aside as a research tradition of systematic experimentation was slowly accepted by the scientific community. The philosophy of using an inductive approach to obtain knowledge — to abandon assumption and to attempt to observe with an open mind — was in contrast with the earlier, Aristotelian approach of deduction, by which analysis of known facts produced further understanding. In practice, many scientists and philosophers believed that a healthy mix of both was needed — the willingness to question assumptions, yet also to interpret observations assumed to have some degree of validity.
By the end of the scientific revolution the qualitative world of book-reading philosophers had been changed into a mechanical, mathematical world to be known through experimental research. Though it is certainly not true that Newtonian science was like modern science in all respects, it conceptually resembled ours in many ways. Many of the hallmarks of modern science, especially with regard to its institutionalization and professionalization, did not become standard until the mid-19th century.
The scientific method resulted in all the technological toys and tools used today; these developments span about 500 years of recent human history. Philosophy without science existed for millennium without understanding much about us or our environment; philosophy alone can be inept. Similarly, science is inept without data.
-
-
-
Today I Learned
in The Lounge
Today I learned: