♀️ Females in philosophy

[RCSaunders]

Philosophy also has many new fields in which women may perform well, for example animal ethics.

Well, that's a good example of all that's wrong with philosophy. I asked my kitty what she thought of animal ethics. She just gave me that, "what, another stupid philsopher," look.

What's next, "tree ethics?"

Good grief!

Scoffing only makes the scoffer look like an idiot. What is your problem with the rest of the animal kingdom? You seem to have this bizarre idea that only humans have evolved intelligence, self-awarness and emotions. Are you a 'bubble boy'?
I've always instintively felt that trees have an awareness and intelligence but couldn't work out how that could be, since they don't have an obvious brain. As it turns out they communicate with each other via a complex system of roots and mycelium, what scienties call mycorrhizal networks --similar to the internet. They nurture each other, warn each of danger, and even have a 'mother tree', the biggest, oldest tree in the forest.
I realise it's a lot more 'comfortable' for humans to kid themselves that the rest of the living kingdom has no awareness or emotions, but only a complete moron could seriously believe this to be the case with what we now know, and even before we knew much about it, using our own observational skills.

My comment was about, "animal ethics." But do animals have ethics? You seem to be talking about what would be called, "human ethics," and how humans should regard animals. I really don't think the animals have ethical views about humans or each other, do they?

Most animals have very little regard for any other life, with the possible exception of other members of their own herd, family, or pack, and not always then either.

Should human beings have any more regard for the animals than the animals themselves have? Wouldn't that require humans to be superior to the animals in some way? Why should humans be more responsible than the animals if the animals are their equals?

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Well, that's a good example of all that's wrong with philosophy. I asked my kitty what she thought of animal ethics. She just gave me that, "what, another stupid philsopher," look.

What's next, "tree ethics?"

Good grief!

Scoffing only makes the scoffer look like an idiot. What is your problem with the rest of the animal kingdom? You seem to have this bizarre idea that only humans have evolved intelligence, self-awarness and emotions. Are you a 'bubble boy'?
I've always instintively felt that trees have an awareness and intelligence but couldn't work out how that could be, since they don't have an obvious brain. As it turns out they communicate with each other via a complex system of roots and mycelium, what scienties call mycorrhizal networks --similar to the internet. They nurture each other, warn each of danger, and even have a 'mother tree', the biggest, oldest tree in the forest.
I realise it's a lot more 'comfortable' for humans to kid themselves that the rest of the living kingdom has no awareness or emotions, but only a complete moron could seriously believe this to be the case with what we now know, and even before we knew much about it, using our own observational skills.

My comment was about, "animal ethics." But do animals have ethics? You seem to be talking about what would be called, "human ethics," and how humans should regard animals. I really don't think the animals have ethical views about humans or each other, do they?

Most animals have very little regard for any other life, with the possible exception of other members of their own herd, family, or pack, and not always then either.

Should human beings have any more regard for the animals than the animals themselves have? Wouldn't that require humans to be superior to the animals in some way? Why should humans be more responsible than the animals if the animals are their equals?

You think that other animals can't have empathy, kindness, compassion? Why wouldn't they? An outside observer would believe that humans don't have any of these qualities either, judging by all the horrible things humans do on a vast scale.

[theory]

Theory, I attended a philosophy postgrad conference in Reading, UK, about a decade ago, to take part in a panel discussion. One of the other sessions was a presentation by Dr Marianne Janack (I think) and a colleague on why there are so few women in academic philosophy departments, and indeed in philosophy in general. A lot of actual research had clearly gone into the paper. I don't have a copy of it but maybe it is obtainable from Dr Janack?

From memory, the paper said that there are a LOT of women undergraduates studying philosophy - maybe even a majority of all philosophy undergraduates. Sadly the proportion of women is steadily whittled down as they climb the academic hierarchy. There aren't quite so many female philosophy postgrads. There are an even smaller proportion of junior lecturers in philosophy, and by the time you get to professors, the proportion is very small. (Sorry I can't recall any actual numbers). This steady shift in the gender balance with academic seniority is more like that found in science subjects such as physics and chemistry rather than in other humanities subjects, where the proportion of female academics remains high at all levels. The paper examined various proposed explanations. There is the possibility that a greater proportion of women than of men drop out when they have children. There is also the more psychological explanation that when members of group A are a tiny proportion within any activity B, then new group A people joining that activity tend to feel that they "don't belong", that it isn't really for them, and have more inhibitions about pushing themselves forwards. I don't know. So structural discouragement rather the the structural exclusion you describe - though no doubt that exists too.

In terms of Philosophy Now magazine, for what it is worth, the proportion of our subscribers who are women is hard to gauge accurately but is definitely much higher than 20%. I'd say it is more like 35 or 40%. However, looking at the "letters to the editors" we receive, the proportion is much smaller - probably only about 10%. My own theory is that men are just more anxious to assert themselves in any forum. Certainly the "letters to the editor" we receive from women tend on average to be better than the "letters to the editor" we receive from men, which might suggest that women write only when they have something good to say. (No disrespect to the many excellent letters we publish which are from male readers, but they are the cream of the crop and many others aren't published due to lack of space.) Most full-length articles we receive (probably about 80%) are by men. Some of the very best articles we've published in the last 30 years have however been by women.

Rick Lewis
(Editor-in-Chief, Philosophy Now)


p.s Your list of women in philosophy links looks useful. Can I add, the Society for Women in Philosophy? (SWiP) They have several websites in different parts of the world, eg http://www.swip-ireland.com , https://www.swipuk.org and http://cswip.ca


Another ps. Theory, I completely agree with you about why it matters that women are somehow discouraged from engaging with philosophy in the same numbers as men. I don't know why women tend to specialise in (and be highly influential in) moral philosophy compared with other areas of philosophy. Is the explanation again something social or to do with philosophy's institutional structure, or with the way women are brought up to see themselves as nurturing and caring ? I don't know.

Interesting information!

Besides statistics with regard women in philosophy, it may also be of interest to include geographic and interest-type based information to discover whether:

1) women in the UK may be more inclined to study philosophy than women in other countries (and if so: why?)
2) women may be interested to read about philosophy without pursuing a career in it (academic vs regular readers)

Partially Examined Mind has a very global audience which may be of influence in their statistics.

The International Association of Women Philosophers was founded in 1976 in Würzburg, Germany.

http://www.women-philosophy.org/

[theory]

What's next, "tree ethics?"

Since the substance of a tree comes from air and not earth, which just amazes me, why not?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ifk6iuLQk28

+1

* plant morality

Philosophy professor Michael Marder:

Philosopher: Plants are sentient beings that should be eaten with respect
His claim that a plant is a sentient “intelligent, social, complex being” has been contested by some biologists, but a stronger reaction has come from animal-rights activists and vegans who fear their cause is undermined by extending a duty of respect to plants.
https://www.irishtimes.com/culture/unth ... -1.1965980

Plant-Thinking: A Philosophy of Vegetal Life
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/167 ... t-thinking

The Philosopher's Plant: An Intellectual Herbarium
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/223 ... er-s-plant

[theory]

I agree. Females may offer valuable perspectives that males may not be as inclined to see. The fact that gods and sages are typically identified as 'male', shows how out-of-balance we are, and demonstrates a major skewing by males for control and domination.

Perhaps noteworthy for the topic is lady Justice, an allegorical personification of the moral force in judicial systems.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_Justice



The correlation between females and morality seems to exist since ancient history.

In ancient Egyptian religion, Ma'at is the Goddess of Truth, Justice and Morality.

https://www.ancient-origins.net/history ... ity-003131
https://www.ancient-egypt-online.com/maat.html
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maat

• Ma'at became the basis of Egyptian culture
• She represented leadership, philosophy and law

[Sculptor]

Right now, women are dominant in the universities. They are, on the average campus, at least 60% of the population there.

Your trouble is that you get a little idea in your head and you think it is real.
What you ought to be doing is checking your facts, and building from knowledge rather than spew your childish male chauvanist prejudice from your weak and inferior brain.

There has been a small gender gap in undergrads in the last few years reported in the UK but this does not mean that "women are dominant".

[Immanuel Can]

Right now, women are dominant in the universities. They are, on the average campus, at least 60% of the population there.

Your trouble is that you get a little idea in your head and you think it is real.

No, the problem is that I can read statistics and reports.

"It is a pattern in many professional programs across the country and in university at large – go to any campus today and you’re likely to see far more women than men. With the exception of a few course areas, this has been the reality since the 1980s...The gender gap is a fact in most OECD countries. But is this just an interesting sociological phenomenon, or a symptom of some deeper problem for males? At this point, no one’s quite sure."

Source: University Affairs

[Sculptor]

Right now, women are dominant in the universities. They are, on the average campus, at least 60% of the population there.

Your trouble is that you get a little idea in your head and you think it is real.

No, the problem is that I can read statistics and reports.

"It is a pattern in many professional programs across the country and in university at large – go to any campus today and you’re likely to see far more women than men. With the exception of a few course areas, this has been the reality since the 1980s...The gender gap is a fact in most OECD countries. But is this just an interesting sociological phenomenon, or a symptom of some deeper problem for males? At this point, no one’s quite sure."

Source: University Affairs

Where does it say women are dominant?
That's just your fantasy world.

PS when you cite please do so properly.

[Immanuel Can]

"It is a pattern in many professional programs across the country and in university at large – go to any campus today and you’re likely to see far more women than men. With the exception of a few course areas, this has been the reality since the 1980s...The gender gap is a fact in most OECD countries. But is this just an interesting sociological phenomenon, or a symptom of some deeper problem for males? At this point, no one’s quite sure."

Source: University Affairs

Where does it say women are dominant?

"...far more women than men..."

Are you reading-impaired?

Here's what I said:

Right now, women are dominant in the universities. They are, on the average campus, at least 60% of the population there. There is probably no more female-friendly atmosphere available to them at present, at least insofar as the institution itself is arranged. Every university has very strident "Women's Studies" faculties, and the vast majority of professors are political Leftists with strong inclinations toward "women's liberation" causes and Feminism. The pill eliminates things like early pregancy, which formerly might have caused women to be sidetracked early, and a woman can expect nothing but financial gain and social praise if she puts off childbearing and sets herself a career instead. If, at any time in history, women have had a straight path into all the Humanities, including Philosophy, it's now.

Which part of that is even questionable?

[Sculptor]

"...far more women than men..."

60% does not mean dominance.

There are more children in schools, that does not mean they dominate the adults.
Moron!

In my University there are 4 lecturers in the Phil Dept out of 11.
Only 6 out of 22 in Southahmpton.
Take a look yourself and see if you can find a UK university where there are more female lecturers than man in Philosophy Departments.

Maybe there is a lack of men because like you they are too stupid to cite a source properly?

[Immanuel Can]

In my University there are 4 lecturers in the Phil Dept out of 11.
Only 6 out of 22 in Southahmpton.

Ask yourself why. They easilly could have gotten posts.

Why didn't they choose to?

Or is your theory that "your university" is sexist, as is Southampton? What's your proof for that?

[Sculptor]

Men Maintain their Dominance over Philosophy Departments in the UK

Druham University Philosophy Department.

Only 6 women out of 24

Sussex University University Philosophy Department.

Ony 4 out of 11

Southhapton University Philosophy Department.

Only 6 women out of 26

St Andrew's University Philosophy Department.

Only 10 out of 33

[Sculptor]

In my University there are 4 lecturers in the Phil Dept out of 11.
Only 6 out of 22 in Southahmpton.

Ask yourself why. They easilly could have gotten posts.

Why didn't they choose to?

Or is your theory that "your university" is sexist, as is Southampton? What's your proof for that?

Ask yourself why you are too stupid to correctly cite an article!

[Immanuel Can]

Ask yourself ...

Non-responsive and silly. I can't be bothered.

[Sculptor]

Ask yourself ...

Non-responsive and silly. I can't be bothered.

Run away, runaway!Run away, runaway!Run away, runaway!