lundi 9 septembre 2013

Les femmes s'en balancent-elles vraiment ?

“I feel women in general are less comfortable than men in inhabiting a highly austere, cold, analytical space, such as the one which philosophy involves. Women as a whole - and there are obvious exceptions - are more drawn to practical, personal matters. It is not that they inherently lack a talent or aptitude for philosophy or higher mathematics, but rather that they are more unwilling than men to devote their lives to a frigid space from which the natural and the human have been eliminated.” 

     Dans ce livre (1939) Susan Stebbing, qui ne s'en balançait pas, analyse des fallacies, parmi lesquelles celle-ci :

The fallacy of the undistributed middle: the traits of some members of a group are attributed to all membersof that group. It is sometimes the case that an attack upon some members can be easily twisted into an attak on all members of that group

addendum 10 sept 13 

   Dans un article de Lorraine Code , paru ici , je trouve cette déclaration (à mes yeux) extraordinaire:

   Donc si je comprends bien , s'interroger sur les raisons, et la raison, est un exercice typiquement mâle.
   Je serais vraiment curieux de savoir ce qu'en pensent les auteurs comme les suivants : 

Maria Alvarez (2010) Kinds of Reasons: An Essay in the Philosophy of Action Oxford University Press 

Pamela Hieronymi ,

par exemple. Est-ce que ces philosophes "s'alignent avec des manières masculines de penser" ?