|
NathanScottPhillips posted:This is a very, very interesting set of posts to appear. The first claims that "an obsession for physical basis for such bahaviors and feelings" is a immoral pursuit. False. In fact it claims that such an obsession is frequently used as an intellectual cover for bigotry. Try not to say false things.
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2016 00:16
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 15:27 |
|
|
asdf32 posted:Trans gendered individuals demonstrate the innate nature of gender. 'Gender' encompasses a whole bunch of behaviors, dispositions, and outward expressions. To say that something about how people experience their gender is innate is not to establish that that whole complex is innate. It remains an open question exactly which parts of that complex are innate and which are learned. Most of the opposition to the innateness thesis in this thread has been to object to the suggestion that something like aggression or risk-taking is innate rather than learned. Which is not the same as claiming that biology has nothing to do with behavior whatsoever.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 20, 2016 01:19
|
|
|
the trump tutelage posted:That is not what I said. I did not say "medical science" views gender dysphoria as abnormal. I said that explaining trans identity through a medical lens (i.e. using medical jargon, analogies and metaphors) is problematic because it invokes ideas like intrinsic nature, biological determinism, healthy versus unhealthy, or the presumption of a materialist solution to the issue of trans identity. I'm having trouble understanding this argument. Here's a couple of propositions: 1. Gender dysphoria is, certeris paribus, an obstacle to human flourishing. 2. Medical intervention can be effective at (partially) ameliorating this obstacle. Is either of these claims problematic, per se? If not, where is the issue located? Is there a further unstated belief that usually accompanies those two? Can you give a concrete example of the mechanism at work?
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2016 01:03
|
|
|
Would you accept a pluralist account on which the paradigms of biology and medicine comprise one helpful approach among (maybe many, maybe few) others? Because that generally seems to be the consensus that this thread is heading toward.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2016 01:55
|
|
|
the trump tutelage posted:Sure? It doesn't matter what I accept or reject, and if it works, it works. This is a strange way to approach a verbal interaction. If you don't think it matters what you or or interlocutor believe, then I'm not sure what you imagine you're trying to accomplish here.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2016 04:49
|
|