If the argument that women "internalize their oppression" holds wouldn't it apply to men internalizing oppressive patriarchy? Where's volition, personal responsibility & choice? If it's all socially constructed then there can be no truth, no reality.
Here is the original paper of the 7 universal rules of morality: "Is it good to cooperate? Testing the theory of morality-as-cooperation in 60 societies" https://osf.io/9546r/ I would argue that this helps build the case for moral realism/naturalism & part of human nature.
would be something that cultural influence also enables. We require to be socialized to develop properly and have options available to us. But we need to get beyond a nature/nurture paradigm to think about this more clearly.being skeptical about certain types of cultural influence — Coben
OK before we get there, consider it like this: Your brain wouldn't work without the "cultural software" that gets installed as you grow, the cultural software that has been undergoing more or less cumulative enhancements and modifications since we evolved into existence. It's not just a matter of values, it's much more fundamental. It's a matter of the very basics of social know-how, technical know-how, language, understandings of options available for action and consequences, cooperation and disruption, etc. If you weren't fully acculturated your brain wouldn't operate as a human brain evolved to operate. You would have fewer options by far. You would be far less adaptable.
So in light of this I wonder why people are wont to insist on human nature being "hardwired" versus socially constructed. — Izat So
OK before we get there, consider it like this: Your brain wouldn't work without the "cultural software" that gets installed as you grow, the cultural software that has been undergoing more or less cumulative enhancements and modifications since we evolved into existence. It's not just a matter of values, it's much more fundamental. It's a matter of the very basics of social know-how, technical know-how, language, understandings of options available for action and consequences, cooperation and disruption, etc. If you weren't fully acculturated your brain wouldn't operate as a human brain evolved to operate. You would have fewer options by far. You would be far less adaptable. — Izat So
Not just socialization enables it. IOW I think parts can feel wrong. Adn not because of other cultural tools and ideas. IOW we are not infinitely malleable. I don't think, say a few hundred years ago, some women might have felt there was something wrong with footbinding or that men did not take them seriously as thinkers required other cultural ideas and tools to make them skeptical about the status quo. Some things fit us better than others. I am certainly using cultural tools right now to argue this, but I think our decisions to fight this or that cultural custom can come from the physical emotional - yes, I acknowledge that the physical emotional is not easily separable from the cultural. But that does not mean that what I am arguing is false, it just means it will not always be easy to tell what is inciting the reaction.But I'm saying that they're outdated views and more accurately, that we need to rethink this very deeply. We cannot conclude that being socialized is more inhibiting than freeing. And
being skeptical about certain types of cultural influence
— Coben
would be something that cultural influence also enables. — Izat So
We require to be socialized to develop properly and have options available to us. But we need to get beyond a nature/nurture paradigm to think about this more clearly. — Izat So
I'd definitely agree with claims that cultural and environmental influences are significant factors in the way that people turn out. But that doesn't mean that someone's brain wouldn't work sans culture, etc. — Terrapin Station
it seems inexplicable to claim that it could all be socially constructed, because it would be difficult to account for how anything got started. — Terrapin Station
there are cultural aspects that I think are damaging and worse than others and/or it would better if I and many others simply were without — Coben
Your assertions are thoroughly missing the perspective I’m sharing. — Izat So
No, you’re merely naysaying and as I’ve said in the OP I’m not interested in disputing the science ( neuro paleontology and other areas of research), just in exploring the implications. — Izat So
Meanwhile, you have not yet explained what a non-socialized human would look like. And you have ignored the concrete evidence of the intellectual damage suffered by feral and abused children.So I don't think that you'd have in mind something like a group of rational, thoroughly self-directed adults living alone and then coming together to decide how to live, do you? — Izat So
Our brains evolved to make use of the cultural tools available to us.
What becomes important to people has to be at least possible to have an effect on us.
Our brains evolved to make use of the cultural tools available to us. Brains and culture coevolved. — Izat So
They [dogs] are not more genetically related to us than chimps, that’s for sure! — Izat So
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.