Female Genius

Discussion of the nature of Ultimate Reality and the path to Enlightenment.
JenJen
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 3:07 pm

Female Genius

Post by JenJen »

http://www.theabsolute.net/minefield/genqtpg.html
Does anyone else laugh at the obvious logic fallacies contained within Otto Weininger, Rousseau, Ambrose Bierce's quotes on this topic? (If you did not figure it out yet, Camille Paglia's quote was taken out of context.)
User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5739
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Female Genius

Post by Dan Rowden »

Perhaps you could point out those "obvious" logical fallacies? - especially given the quotes don't formally make an argument, as such...

And perhaps you could explain why this quote requires "context":
Male conspiracy cannot explain all female failures. I am convinced that, even without restrictions, there still would have been no female Pascal, Milton, or Kant. Genius is not checked by social obstacles: it will overcome. Camille Paglia, in Sexual Personae
JenJen
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun May 02, 2010 3:07 pm

Re: Female Genius

Post by JenJen »

Dan Rowden wrote:Perhaps you could point out those "obvious" logical fallacies? - especially given the quotes don't formally make an argument, as such...

And perhaps you could explain why this quote requires "context":
Male conspiracy cannot explain all female failures. I am convinced that, even without restrictions, there still would have been no female Pascal, Milton, or Kant. Genius is not checked by social obstacles: it will overcome. Camille Paglia, in Sexual Personae
Some things are too obvious to point out.
...
Look up that context and you'll find out.
User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5739
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Female Genius

Post by Dan Rowden »

JenJen wrote:
Dan Rowden wrote:Perhaps you could point out those "obvious" logical fallacies? - especially given the quotes don't formally make an argument, as such...
Some things are too obvious to point out.
That would come under the heading: "classic cop-out". As for the Paglia quote, the larger quote is:
"Women have been discouraged from genres such as sculpture that require studio training or expensive materials. But in philosophy, mathematics, and poetry, the only materials are pen and paper. Male conspiracy cannot explain all female failures. I am convinced that, even without restrictions, there still would have been no female Pascal, Milton, or Kant. Genius is not checked by social obstacles: it will overcome. Men's egotism, so disgusting in the talentless, is the source of their greatness as a sex. . . . Even now, with all vocations open, I marvel at the rarity of the woman driven by artistic or intellectual obsession, that self-mutilating derangement of social relationship which, in its alternate forms of crime and ideation, is the disgrace and glory of the human species."
You must mean a broader context still because that doesn't seem to make your case (whatever that really is anyway). Why don't you simply state what that case is?
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Female Genius

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

As for the possible "context" of Paglia: she often writes about the dynamics between men and women with the feminine being the context for any masculine venture. The mysterious black womb any male structure emerges from, the all-present mother he seeks approval of, the family, the nursing, or the company, the audience he seeks and craves; aligning the feminine with the material or more psychologically: the maternal base of his functioning.

Not sure how this, even when taken as truth, would change the meaning of the quote as it stands though, in the obvious context of trying to capture the spirit and value of genius.
pointexter
Posts: 59
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 7:19 pm

Re: Female Genius

Post by pointexter »

OP's games are... Look at ME and l Know Something You Don't, nah, nah, nah, nah, nah
User avatar
Blair
Posts: 1527
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2005 2:47 pm

Re: Female Genius

Post by Blair »

JenJen wrote:Some things are too obvious to point out.
Like, your motivations?
Gurrb
Posts: 271
Joined: Wed Dec 09, 2009 1:40 pm

Re: Female Genius

Post by Gurrb »

fame and wealth will not be marked by one's riches and followers, but by one's perceived riches and followers.
User avatar
Anders Schlander
Posts: 222
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 12:11 am
Location: Denmark

Re: Female Genius

Post by Anders Schlander »

Gurrb, think for a minute, what is the difference between the percieved and what 'is'?

my point is, the belongings you have *are* the belongings you perceive to have.
whatsnew38

Re: Female Genius

Post by whatsnew38 »

I am a good looking Caucasian male of 39yrs creative / entrepreneurial genius looking for a female genius for LTR and children. I own and operate a huge infrastructure of web properties currently worth significant money, soon to be worth several billion. Need to find an open-minded life partner female genius interested in family life, fun and children. My time on this planet is running out as I have 40+or- years left, 20 or so of significant quality, so if you think your compatible please get back to me.
User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5739
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Female Genius

Post by Dan Rowden »

Good luck with that.
User avatar
Anders Schlander
Posts: 222
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 12:11 am
Location: Denmark

Re: Female Genius

Post by Anders Schlander »

A genius that's female, or an emotional Genius?

Geniuses may have different bodies, different styles, thoughts, insights, but the essence of genius is the same. People attach themselves to the female genius because it is an entirely different appearance to genius on it's own.

Female genius, if anything, is the great Woman, for woman it is to indulge in the world in the best way possible, for man it is the illusion of womans most attractive traits. She seems to have no worries, she seems to know everything, she looks indestructible.

It is as if theres two meanings, Genius is to to be, and thus act, truthful, whereas the 'female' Genius, is the unconscious fairy, deflecting reality with it's wings.

It is obvious what genius most people admire, is it not? but to deflect reality is a hard and enduring task, and there is no time to think.
User avatar
Kunga
Posts: 2333
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2006 4:04 am
Contact:

Re: Female Genius

Post by Kunga »

your post was full of it (emotions).
Animus
Posts: 1351
Joined: Thu Nov 27, 2008 4:31 pm

Re: Female Genius

Post by Animus »

I haven't come across any female geniuses, though I suppose it does take a certain skill to "deflect reality".
Carmel

Re: Female Genius

Post by Carmel »

I haven't come across any male geniuses either, funny that.

You'd have to define "reality" for that last statement to have any real meaning, but I don't necessarily think it takes much skill to deflect it...a joint and a video game oughta do the trick.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Female Genius

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

Then again, I was just reading today: Video gamers can control dreams, study hints
Both lucid dreamers and gamers seemed to have better spatial skills and were less prone to motion sickness. The two groups have also demonstrated a high level of focus or concentration, whether honed through lucidity-training activities, such as meditation, or through hours spent fighting virtual enemies to reach the next level in a game.
And the positive short-term effects of cannabis are known as "euphoria, feelings of well-being, relaxation or stress reduction, increased appreciation of humor, greater enjoyment of food taste and aroma, music or art, joviality, metacognition and introspection, enhanced recollection (episodic memory), increased sensuality, increased awareness of sensation, increased libido, creative or philosophical thinking, disruption of linear memory or thought". (wiki)

For deflecting "reality" perhaps other devices would be more ideal? I'd suggest anything that flattens.
User avatar
Alex T. Jacob
Posts: 413
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:04 am

Re: Female Genius

Post by Alex T. Jacob »

"Talent hits a target no-one else can hit. Genius hits a target no-one else can see"

(Ufff! This does not reflect well on some 'local geniuses').

When I was growing up but still in swaddling clothes---we moved from commune to commune but in this case we were all travelling by caravan between Barcelona and Prague with a couple of trained bears and about 30 kilos of Afghani Hashish---I often overheard discussions, as we ambled along those country roads under the billowing clouds, along with the gurgling of the ever-lit hookah and the giggling of fornicating couples, that touched on the lives and accomplishments of these women:

Marie Curie
Madame de Stael
Emily Bronte
Hildegard of Bingen
Judit Polgár
Sor Juana de la Cruz
Frida Kahlo
Hanna Arendt
Émilie du Châtelet
Hypatia of Alexandria
Sofia Kovalevskaya
Maria Gaetana Agnesi
Emmy Noether
Artemesia Gentileschi
George Eliot
I can't go on. I'll go on.
Carmel

Re: Female Genius

Post by Carmel »

Diebert:

For deflecting "reality" perhaps other devices would be more ideal? I'd suggest anything that flattens.[/quote]

Carmel:

Flattens? like pot?! Actually, most long term pot smokers seem really deadened to me. They have a flat affectation and don't often resemble the description you provided. They seem cut off from everything, but not in the sense of a healthy spiritual detachment. It's as though they're not really "present". It's more like they're comfortably numb.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Female Genius

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

Alex T. Jacob wrote:"Talent hits a target no-one else can hit. Genius hits a target no-one else can see"
And then you have those who never seem to be able to hit any target at all! Do we have a name for those?
Carmel

Re: Female Genius

Post by Carmel »

yeah, "stoners"
User avatar
Alex T. Jacob
Posts: 413
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2011 2:04 am

Re: Female Genius

Post by Alex T. Jacob »

  • They sputter and bark
    they drool and shout
    and forgot long ago what they were talking about!

    Ryan and Nick and Diebert and Cory
    why does it sound like its all the same story?

    Who's got the full deck
    and an intellect complex?
    well the answer is simple, our own darling Alex.

    I'm on the brinking of thinking
    the source of their nirvana
    is almost certainly marijuana...
[and please note the indents]
I can't go on. I'll go on.
User avatar
Anders Schlander
Posts: 222
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 12:11 am
Location: Denmark

Re: Female Genius

Post by Anders Schlander »

Carmel wrote:I haven't come across any male geniuses either, funny that.

You'd have to define "reality" for that last statement to have any real meaning, but I don't necessarily think it takes much skill to deflect it...a joint and a video game oughta do the trick.
'

deflecting reality means having interest in delusion, acting on those delusions, rather than being aware of the nature of God, basically.

Teenagers usually aren't well developed in maintaining all the delusions and contradictions in society, which indicates it takes a kind of 'mastering' I guess. People who wish to master conventional life usually like to believe in this kinda 'female genius' because it gives the appearance of mastering reality.

The point is that it's alot of work and alot of suffering, it's a pretty fragile way to live.
User avatar
Anders Schlander
Posts: 222
Joined: Sat Apr 11, 2009 12:11 am
Location: Denmark

Re: Female Genius

Post by Anders Schlander »

Kunga wrote:your post was full of it (emotions).
fair enough, im not perfect, but i wanted to try and give form to the difference, it's obvious that when people talk about female genius, they don't mean a genius with a type of body, We're not discussing fat geniuses, or thin geniuses, tall geniuses, or short geniuses... but Genius, or something not-genius.

Female genius is either genius, or it's not. It can't be both.
User avatar
Diebert van Rhijn
Posts: 6469
Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2005 4:43 pm

Re: Female Genius

Post by Diebert van Rhijn »

Carmel wrote:Actually, most long term pot smokers seem really deadened to me.
There's a certain psychology of aloofness involved with any substance abuse. And many pot smokers use the easy mix of tobacco and the hash (joints), causing way more chance on a watered down, stoned effect. The nicotine in the tobacco makes addiction way easier and the watered down effects, the haze, caused mainly by the conflicting effects of the mix of substances, are welcomed as hide-out to over-anxious souls. Only the relaxing qualities are preserved, not much of the other possibilities. Then again, this really varies between the people and the type of plants, but the addicts are often not getting the entheogen properties of cannabis simply because they were already addicts, hardened, before starting out.

By the way, this is just an infomercial trying to fill in the somewhat sheltered, limited exposure you might have, but I don't do or advocate anything of it. It's really hard to predict how people react on it really.
User avatar
Dan Rowden
Posts: 5739
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2001 8:03 pm
Contact:

Re: Female Genius

Post by Dan Rowden »

Alex T. Jacob wrote:I often overheard discussions, as we ambled along those country roads under the billowing clouds, along with the gurgling of the ever-lit hookah and the giggling of fornicating couples, that touched on the lives and accomplishments of these women:

Marie Curie
Why do people always trot out Marie Curie when there's a discussion of "female genius"? Firstly, she didn't work alone nor achieve her Nobel prizes alone (well, one at any rate). Secondly, her scientific achievements are somewhat overstated. I don't recall any of the other discoverers of elements being hailed as "genii". Was she a quality scientist? Yes. Does she represent a counterpoint to the claim that women could not get educated and therefore achieve things? Yes. But listing her as a genius is utterly laughable. But then, so would be listing someone like Newton, who, outside of science, was a blithering idiot.

[edit: stupid typo]
Locked