'An Appalling Report'

Started by Homo Aestheticus, October 20, 2008, 07:11:33 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

karlhenning


Bulldog

Quote from: Josquin des Prez on November 18, 2008, 11:47:18 AM
Nonsense. I merely see reality for what it is,

No, you likely create your own reality to prop up your low self-esteem.  But I still would like to know why you insist on lumping folks into a large group and then make pronouncements about them.  Why not simply judge the individual?

Josquin des Prez

Quote from: Bulldog on November 18, 2008, 01:04:10 PM
No, you likely create your own reality to prop up your low self-esteem.

Whatever.

Quote from: Bulldog on November 18, 2008, 01:04:10 PM
But I still would like to know why you insist on lumping folks into a large group and then make pronouncements about them.  Why not simply judge the individual?

Because i'm trying to achieve a particular conclusion about the group?

Bulldog

Quote from: Josquin des Prez on November 18, 2008, 01:07:36 PM
Because i'm trying to achieve a particular conclusion about the group?

But why do you want to reach a particular conclusion about women? 

karlhenning

Quote from: Josquin des Prez on November 18, 2008, 01:07:36 PM
Because i'm trying to achieve a particular conclusion about the group?

Recognizing that you are cooking the data in order to reach the conclusion you want, is an important step to rehabilitation.

Josquin des Prez

#245
Quote from: PSmith08 on November 18, 2008, 12:26:09 PM
Analogy:

All ice-cream is chocolate-flavored.
I refuse to consider any non-chocolate-flavored frozen salt milk as ice-cream.
Ergo, all ice-cream is chocolate-flavored.

I guess the key here is to determine whether non-chocolate-flavored frozen salt milk is ice-cream, is it. The fact i haven't acknowledged your definition of genius, and to imply that that is a sign my argument is tautological is fallacious and in and of itself. Why to you take your own definition for granted, thus creating a tautology of your own? Can you show me the female counterpart to Bach? Yes or no?

Josquin des Prez

Quote from: karlhenning on November 18, 2008, 01:15:21 PM
Recognizing that you are cooking the data in order to reach the conclusion you want, is an important step to rehabilitation.

You still haven't proven that that is what i'm doing here. 

Josquin des Prez

Quote from: Bulldog on November 18, 2008, 01:11:15 PM
But why do you want to reach a particular conclusion about women? 

To fight the lies propagated by political correctness, lies which in my view have been instrumental in the lessening of our achievements as a civilization?

Bulldog

Quote from: Josquin des Prez on November 18, 2008, 01:17:52 PM
Can you show me the female counterpart to Bach? Yes or no?

That is one dumb question. ::)

Josquin des Prez


Bulldog

Quote from: Josquin des Prez on November 18, 2008, 01:24:07 PM
To fight the lies propagated by political correctness, lies which in my view have been instrumental in the lessening of our achievements as a civilization?

So you're a fighter?  Try fighting your bigoted beliefs.

Bulldog

Quote from: Josquin des Prez on November 18, 2008, 01:24:55 PM
Just answer it.

No, I'll leave the dumb stuff to you since you are so good at it.

adamdavid80

Wait...since black people are less intelligent than white people...and Barack Obama is now the president-elect...adna  graduate of Harvard law...does that mean J is dumber than a black man?

Because with that info, J has got to be one stupid white boy.  Stupider than a black man...sheeee-it!!!
Hardly any of us expects life to be completely fair; but for Eric, it's personal.

- Karl Henning

PSmith08

Quote from: Josquin des Prez on November 18, 2008, 01:17:52 PM
I guess the key here is to determine whether non-chocolate-flavored frozen salt milk is ice-cream, is it. The fact i haven't acknowledged your definition of genius, and to imply that that is a sign my argument is tautological is fallacious and in and of itself. Why to you take your own definition for granted, thus creating a tautology of your own? Can you show me the female counterpart to Bach? Yes or no?

With pleasure. Just a couple of things, though.

By which standards shall I analyze all female composers -- or is it just female Baroque composers -- to arrive at a conclusion on whether or not there is a female counterpart to Bach? Furthermore, why is music the subject for the analysis? Why is music the logically necessary fiftieth-percentile measure of genius, other than the fact that you think yourself more competent in that field than, say, particle physics or visual arts?

Now, I've got other things to do tonight, but I'll keep an eye out for your response. I doubt that you'll articulate both a rationale for choosing music and standards by which we shall analyze composers. Why? Well, standards are simply unnecessary to your program. Even if you did have guidelines, they would apply only to men -- as a necessary consequence of your general "assumption," so it would be difficult to apply them to women. That's not entirely correct: We would be applying standards designed explicitly to favor men to women, as opposed to applying neutral standards equally and fairly.

No, you've built a system designed to ensure that a woman doesn't enter consideration in any regard, and you act as though it's a great result that women aren't in your system. That's like putting $20 in a box and saying, when you open the box, "I found $20." Of course you did, you put it there. I keep harping on this, but I'll say it again: Your "objective" approach to this subject is anything but, since you don't abide by basic laws of proof and analysis. It is, then, a little disingenuous on your part to demand "Can you show me the female counterpart to Bach?"

Don't ask questions and then say that the answers are not correct because you've predefined the answers as incorrect. That's dirty pool in my book.

lisa needs braces

Sexual Frustration, thy name is Josquin des Pres!


Josquin des Prez

#255
Quote from: PSmith08 on November 18, 2008, 01:49:46 PM
By which standards shall I analyze all female composers -- or is it just female Baroque composers -- to arrive at a conclusion on whether or not there is a female counterpart to Bach?

Pick whatever standard you like. It is not my business to tell you how to determine genius. Such a realization can only come within yourself. The question is moot of course. You won't answer it because you can't. There is no female counterpart to Bach, or Beethoven, or Shakespeare, or Homer. We all know that.

Quote from: PSmith08 on November 18, 2008, 01:49:46 PM
Furthermore, why is music the subject for the analysis?

It is not music that is the subject of the analysis, genius is.

Quote from: PSmith08 on November 18, 2008, 01:49:46 PM
Don't ask questions and then say that the answers are not correct because you've predefined the answers as incorrect.

Except the answers are actually incorrect. I'm bidding you to give me a correct answer, but you won't. In fact, you won't go as far as defending those particular answers which i consider to be incorrect, but which in fact, if not erroneous, should be very easy to prove correct, because that would put you in the same position you are trying to corner me with: how do you prove that which cannot be quantified, but can only be understood?

drogulus



     There's no female counterpart to Bach. Because of the inherently subjective nature of such estimations, that is a social fact. It's also an indication of a more general phenomena, the higher frequency of certain kinds of intellectual "hypertrophy" among males. Though that wouldn't prevent the emergence of a female Bach, it would certainly greatly reduce the probability of such an event. So we are observing 2 phenomena which interact in hard to unravel ways: The social reinforcement of gender differences that are based on genuine differences in nature. The reinforcement by social prejudice acts to turn what is a tendency into dogma about capabilities. Nothing prevents the occasional female genius, and they exist, though they may be steered towards some expressions of it and away from others. Like the males, the female geniuses will find some way to use their abilities, so I don't think unfavorable social conditions could prevent us from finding them. The distribution, IOW, is real. Male geniuses rarely stay hidden, I think, so that's probably the case for females, too. It's unlikely that there are "missing" geniuses of either sex.
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:123.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/123.0
      
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:109.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/115.0

Josquin des Prez

#257
Quote from: adamdavid80 on November 18, 2008, 01:30:09 PM
Wait...since black people are less intelligent than white people...and Barack Obama is now the president-elect...adna  graduate of Harvard law...does that mean J is dumber than a black man?

Because with that info, J has got to be one stupid white boy.  Stupider than a black man...sheeee-it!!!

I never said that all those of African descent are less intelligent than all whites, because that would imply that all whites are intelligent, and heaven forbid! It is a simple matter of distribution. I would also be careful in using terms such as "superiority". It depends on the context. Ever wondered why blacks seem to dominate most popular sports in America? Besides, whites, of any variety, are not exactly the smartest people around. Ashkenazi Jews earn that title.

Josquin des Prez

Quote from: drogulus on November 18, 2008, 03:14:37 PM
The reinforcement by social prejudice acts to turn what is a tendency into dogma about capabilities.

Yes, but the way our society goes about in dispelling the dogma is by insisting that there is no tendency.

adamdavid80

Quote from: Bulldog on November 18, 2008, 09:04:14 AM
In effect, your arguments are no different than from those who believe that African Americans are less intelligent than white ones.

To which J responded that he is one of those people.

Hardly any of us expects life to be completely fair; but for Eric, it's personal.

- Karl Henning