In that case, our truths/opinions aren't compatible. If you don't believe that I have the same intellectual capacity that you do, then that is simply what you see as the truth. Something tells me that I will never get you to see things my way, and I assure you, you'll never get me to see the way that you do. I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree.
Then let's discuss why what we see as truth differs, and come to a conclusion. I have seen things your way before, before I have what I see as truths now.
By the way, earlier you mentioned that men were more intelligent because they had more gray matter than women. I read up a bit on the matter, and found that professor Richard Haier, who led the experiments done on male and female brains, said, “These findings suggest that human evolution has created two different types of brains designed for equally intelligent behavior." Basically, though the male and female brains are wired for two separate types of thinking, the two different roles are equally intelligent. I used another article to cross-reference this information, which read, "Researchers stressed that just because the two sexes think differently, this does not affect intellectual performance." and, "Scientists find it very interesting that while men and women use two very different activity centers and neurological pathways, men and women perform equally well on broad measures of cognitive ability, such as intelligence tests." Did you do your research?
It would depends on when those articles or statements were made. Saying women are inferior to males in any sense of intelligence gets a bad reaction. A math teacher was fired for stating boys are better at math. Unfortunatly, that is the way the world is. I'm looking more in to the subject, I haven't read it up in a year or so. You have to remember that even if men were superior in intelligence, society would never allow it to be seem, nor stated. So they go for "they're both equal".
Secondly. If males and females are as smart as eachother, that would still make males superior. They both have the same intelligence, but only males have superior strength.
I have no doubt that in different areas, women have equal performance, such as women are equally as good at language as men are at math. But, we need to see which one of the two that each brain is more better at for usefulness in the society that was made after our brains were. So do the rules and intelligence our society go by run better with male brain or female brain?
I think that it is quite a clear indication that if one group has more of something that enhances their ability to do something, and the other group has something else that enhances something else, they aren't going to be the same in every subject.
I would have to read more in to that psychologists statements. Did he give any information that shows how they are equally smarter?
So far these science links state that males are better at science, math (problem solving). What intelligence is more required in today's society, the intelligence that gives better mathamatics, better science, and more reasonable and logical thinking without more emotion, or the intelligence that isn't equiped to do as well as the other in maths (problem solving and science, etc? White matter supports multitasking and things such as language, which I believe women excel more at. However, when it comes to progressing things, male brains are more equaiped, and society shows this with all the great men in the past and present that progress out technology, science, etc.
Coiuld you link those pages, I would like to see them, too.
Thanks.
Your first statement is what bothers me. You say that it would be politically correct to say that they're equal, and so you think it's implied that men probably are? I see why you might think that, but you have to remember that this is scientific and medical evidence. The doctors and professors involved in the study would not have themselves quoted saying faulty information solely to be "politically correct," it would go against their credibility and their pride.
Secondly, is strength really how we judge a person? If we were to somehow get Hitler and Martin Luther King Jr. to fight to the death, and Hitler won, would we say, "Oh, Hitler must be the superior person." It might have been different a couple hundred years ago, but in this day and age, strength doesn't count nearly as much as intelligence and the ability to function in society.
Neither brain is more useful to society- like the articles said, each brain was built by evolution for a certain, equally intelligent, equally important task. We're not debating with math right now, we're debating with language. Though our society does seem to value math and science more, language, art, and emotion are equally as important in a spiritual way as well as a mental way. The world isn't just about progress, progress, progress. I know that you don't like emotion, since it dissuades the truth (and you are very correct). But that's only from a debating standpoint. What would the world be if we couldn't feel? If we could never get fully, emotionally invested? If we didn't love our children as much as we do, chances are, a lot of them would end up dead and unappreciated.
I think the point I'm trying to make is, you see the world as being clockwork- we have to keep moving, and getting better technology. I'm trying to tell you (for lack of a better phrase) to slow down and smell the roses. There's a different side to life that you're just not acknowledging.
I'd write more too, but I also have places to be. I read the same articles that you did, plus these:
Society is filled with it. Today we avoid anything that would show women as inferior at something, even if they are, so it isn't really a stretch to say they would be bmade to go by politicl correctness.
You're missing the point. You said we are both equally intelligent. If that is so, then men also are far more stronger, so they have an xtra trait for usefulness. If they are equal, then have one more extra trait that is needed, then that would imply they have more to offer.?
I have to dissagree. We could of gotten this far in technology without those things, where as we couldn't without the male intelligence, science, math, etc.
I never said emotion was bad, I said it's bad when it overcomes logic.
Life isn't all that different. We work towards progression our whole lives, and so does our species.
(Hurrying this up, so I'll read and reply back to those links in a bit. I have to do barn work)
An extra trait for usefulness? Sorry I'm bringing Hitler up so much, but he saw things in the same light, only he killed anyone that he didn't see to be useful enough. Not that you're Hitler, I just wanted to draw the connection.
Again, I think the problem is that we're looking for different character traits in people. I'm looking for a sense of loving and overall morality, you're looking for progress.
Yes, we've gotten technology from "male intelligence," but you're missing my point- what I'm saying is that technology isn't everything. We can't judge a person by their degrees of usefulness. There's more to life than moving forward, and if you don't learn to appreciate that, then you'll never have a chance to experience it.
That's exactly what I'm saying- emotion is only bad from a debating viewpoint, and the whole world isn't a debate website.
I have to go back to you using the term "male intelligence." Do we really have to divide up our society that way? The whole world isn't a war between men and women.
I would of replied last night, but my internet was being an asshole.
I don't see women inferior to me by default.
I do treat people how I want to be treated. I respect them (as an opposing debater) and read what they have to say and reply to all of the imortant parts, and if asked to reply to a specific part, I do.
I have to go for a bit, so I'll reply to the second part soon. I had to rush the top part, unfortunatly.
Isn't that what we just did? My belief is that women and men are equal, that we all have different versions of the truth, and my conclusion is that we're different people with different opinions, and maybe we can never see eye to eye. Your belief is that men are naturally superior to women, that your truth is the truth, and that as of now, we have no conclusion.
No, we more so discussed the methods I express what I believe to be facts, not why we see them as truths.
I'll start the debate off. What makes the female gender equal to the male gender?
Before we begin, I feel like we've already had many, many debates that will likely resolve in the same way as this one, usually with you as an anon. Is it really necessary to go over the same points again (especially ones that we just outlined in our previous discussion) on a thread that has almost nothing to do with gender equality?
If you still think this discussion to be necessary, then here's my general rule of thumb; treat everyone like you, as a human being, want to be treated. Because that's what we are- humans. And that's what everyone says that they're striving for, masculinists and feminists alike. Neither group is particularly effective in working for that goal, but that is the ultimatum. Every human treated well, regardless of intelligence, race, gender, or creed. On the off chance that you are right, and men are somehow superior to women, that still doesn't change the fact that every human on this earth has the right to be treated as a human. That means basic respect for a human being. Even if the person that you're talking to is a total and complete jackass, you are still obligated to treat them in a civil manner and see them as an equal.
If you don't to, then you don't need to. Just remember that I was willing to hear your side of the debate in a calm manner, and that I was not just saying I was right, but also listening to your side.
I do treat people the way I want to be treated. I treat people with respect (as an opposing debater). I exress my argument, then give examples and reasons to why I believe it to be right. I won't thumb someone down without explaining why (so they have the chance to prove why I thumbed them down wrong), and I look for reliable sources of information to link if asked. If anything, the majority of people aren't going by that rule of thumb.
Fair point. But that's on IIN, where everyone is set on debate mode (whether they're particularly good at it or not). What about in real life, when you evidently see women as being inferior to men like yourself. Regardless of whether you make your beliefs known to them, is that treating them as you'd like to be treated? Do you want me to look down on you because you were born a man, and I was born a woman?
Do you have IIN enemies?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
In that case, our truths/opinions aren't compatible. If you don't believe that I have the same intellectual capacity that you do, then that is simply what you see as the truth. Something tells me that I will never get you to see things my way, and I assure you, you'll never get me to see the way that you do. I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree.
--
[Old Memory]
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Then let's discuss why what we see as truth differs, and come to a conclusion. I have seen things your way before, before I have what I see as truths now.
--
nAt2017
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
nAt2017
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
By the way, earlier you mentioned that men were more intelligent because they had more gray matter than women. I read up a bit on the matter, and found that professor Richard Haier, who led the experiments done on male and female brains, said, “These findings suggest that human evolution has created two different types of brains designed for equally intelligent behavior." Basically, though the male and female brains are wired for two separate types of thinking, the two different roles are equally intelligent. I used another article to cross-reference this information, which read, "Researchers stressed that just because the two sexes think differently, this does not affect intellectual performance." and, "Scientists find it very interesting that while men and women use two very different activity centers and neurological pathways, men and women perform equally well on broad measures of cognitive ability, such as intelligence tests." Did you do your research?
--
[Old Memory]
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
-
[Old Memory]
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
It would depends on when those articles or statements were made. Saying women are inferior to males in any sense of intelligence gets a bad reaction. A math teacher was fired for stating boys are better at math. Unfortunatly, that is the way the world is. I'm looking more in to the subject, I haven't read it up in a year or so. You have to remember that even if men were superior in intelligence, society would never allow it to be seem, nor stated. So they go for "they're both equal".
Secondly. If males and females are as smart as eachother, that would still make males superior. They both have the same intelligence, but only males have superior strength.
I have no doubt that in different areas, women have equal performance, such as women are equally as good at language as men are at math. But, we need to see which one of the two that each brain is more better at for usefulness in the society that was made after our brains were. So do the rules and intelligence our society go by run better with male brain or female brain?
http://socyberty.com/society/men-vs-women-who-is-more-intelligent-2/
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/01/050121100142.htm
I think that it is quite a clear indication that if one group has more of something that enhances their ability to do something, and the other group has something else that enhances something else, they aren't going to be the same in every subject.
I would have to read more in to that psychologists statements. Did he give any information that shows how they are equally smarter?
So far these science links state that males are better at science, math (problem solving). What intelligence is more required in today's society, the intelligence that gives better mathamatics, better science, and more reasonable and logical thinking without more emotion, or the intelligence that isn't equiped to do as well as the other in maths (problem solving and science, etc? White matter supports multitasking and things such as language, which I believe women excel more at. However, when it comes to progressing things, male brains are more equaiped, and society shows this with all the great men in the past and present that progress out technology, science, etc.
Coiuld you link those pages, I would like to see them, too.
Thanks.
I would say more, but I'm hurrying.
--
nAt2017
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Your first statement is what bothers me. You say that it would be politically correct to say that they're equal, and so you think it's implied that men probably are? I see why you might think that, but you have to remember that this is scientific and medical evidence. The doctors and professors involved in the study would not have themselves quoted saying faulty information solely to be "politically correct," it would go against their credibility and their pride.
Secondly, is strength really how we judge a person? If we were to somehow get Hitler and Martin Luther King Jr. to fight to the death, and Hitler won, would we say, "Oh, Hitler must be the superior person." It might have been different a couple hundred years ago, but in this day and age, strength doesn't count nearly as much as intelligence and the ability to function in society.
Neither brain is more useful to society- like the articles said, each brain was built by evolution for a certain, equally intelligent, equally important task. We're not debating with math right now, we're debating with language. Though our society does seem to value math and science more, language, art, and emotion are equally as important in a spiritual way as well as a mental way. The world isn't just about progress, progress, progress. I know that you don't like emotion, since it dissuades the truth (and you are very correct). But that's only from a debating standpoint. What would the world be if we couldn't feel? If we could never get fully, emotionally invested? If we didn't love our children as much as we do, chances are, a lot of them would end up dead and unappreciated.
I think the point I'm trying to make is, you see the world as being clockwork- we have to keep moving, and getting better technology. I'm trying to tell you (for lack of a better phrase) to slow down and smell the roses. There's a different side to life that you're just not acknowledging.
I'd write more too, but I also have places to be. I read the same articles that you did, plus these:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6849058/ns/technology_and_science-science/t/genders-really-do-think-differently/#.UArI9HDavmd
http://www.livescience.com/3808-men-women-differently.html
Thanks.
--
[Old Memory]
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Society is filled with it. Today we avoid anything that would show women as inferior at something, even if they are, so it isn't really a stretch to say they would be bmade to go by politicl correctness.
You're missing the point. You said we are both equally intelligent. If that is so, then men also are far more stronger, so they have an xtra trait for usefulness. If they are equal, then have one more extra trait that is needed, then that would imply they have more to offer.?
I have to dissagree. We could of gotten this far in technology without those things, where as we couldn't without the male intelligence, science, math, etc.
I never said emotion was bad, I said it's bad when it overcomes logic.
Life isn't all that different. We work towards progression our whole lives, and so does our species.
(Hurrying this up, so I'll read and reply back to those links in a bit. I have to do barn work)
--
nAt2017
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
See More Comments =>
An extra trait for usefulness? Sorry I'm bringing Hitler up so much, but he saw things in the same light, only he killed anyone that he didn't see to be useful enough. Not that you're Hitler, I just wanted to draw the connection.
Again, I think the problem is that we're looking for different character traits in people. I'm looking for a sense of loving and overall morality, you're looking for progress.
Yes, we've gotten technology from "male intelligence," but you're missing my point- what I'm saying is that technology isn't everything. We can't judge a person by their degrees of usefulness. There's more to life than moving forward, and if you don't learn to appreciate that, then you'll never have a chance to experience it.
That's exactly what I'm saying- emotion is only bad from a debating viewpoint, and the whole world isn't a debate website.
I have to go back to you using the term "male intelligence." Do we really have to divide up our society that way? The whole world isn't a war between men and women.
I would of replied last night, but my internet was being an asshole.
I don't see women inferior to me by default.
I do treat people how I want to be treated. I respect them (as an opposing debater) and read what they have to say and reply to all of the imortant parts, and if asked to reply to a specific part, I do.
I have to go for a bit, so I'll reply to the second part soon. I had to rush the top part, unfortunatly.
Isn't that what we just did? My belief is that women and men are equal, that we all have different versions of the truth, and my conclusion is that we're different people with different opinions, and maybe we can never see eye to eye. Your belief is that men are naturally superior to women, that your truth is the truth, and that as of now, we have no conclusion.
--
[Old Memory]
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
No, we more so discussed the methods I express what I believe to be facts, not why we see them as truths.
I'll start the debate off. What makes the female gender equal to the male gender?
--
nAt2017
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Before we begin, I feel like we've already had many, many debates that will likely resolve in the same way as this one, usually with you as an anon. Is it really necessary to go over the same points again (especially ones that we just outlined in our previous discussion) on a thread that has almost nothing to do with gender equality?
If you still think this discussion to be necessary, then here's my general rule of thumb; treat everyone like you, as a human being, want to be treated. Because that's what we are- humans. And that's what everyone says that they're striving for, masculinists and feminists alike. Neither group is particularly effective in working for that goal, but that is the ultimatum. Every human treated well, regardless of intelligence, race, gender, or creed. On the off chance that you are right, and men are somehow superior to women, that still doesn't change the fact that every human on this earth has the right to be treated as a human. That means basic respect for a human being. Even if the person that you're talking to is a total and complete jackass, you are still obligated to treat them in a civil manner and see them as an equal.
--
[Old Memory]
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
If you don't to, then you don't need to. Just remember that I was willing to hear your side of the debate in a calm manner, and that I was not just saying I was right, but also listening to your side.
I do treat people the way I want to be treated. I treat people with respect (as an opposing debater). I exress my argument, then give examples and reasons to why I believe it to be right. I won't thumb someone down without explaining why (so they have the chance to prove why I thumbed them down wrong), and I look for reliable sources of information to link if asked. If anything, the majority of people aren't going by that rule of thumb.
--
nAt2017
11 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Fair point. But that's on IIN, where everyone is set on debate mode (whether they're particularly good at it or not). What about in real life, when you evidently see women as being inferior to men like yourself. Regardless of whether you make your beliefs known to them, is that treating them as you'd like to be treated? Do you want me to look down on you because you were born a man, and I was born a woman?