PHIL 170 WINTER TERM 2015
PHIL 170 WINTER TERM 2015 Phil170- Love & Sex
Popular in Philosophy
Phil170- Love & Sex
verified elite notetaker
Popular in PHIL-Philosophy
This 21 page Bundle was uploaded by Shyonna Leach on Tuesday February 10, 2015. The Bundle belongs to Phil170- Love & Sex at University of Oregon taught by Ms. Mayfield in Fall. Since its upload, it has received 130 views. For similar materials see Philosophy in PHIL-Philosophy at University of Oregon.
Reviews for PHIL 170 WINTER TERM 2015
Killer notes! I'm stoked I can finally just pay attention in class!!!
-Miss Kris O'Connell
Report this Material
What is Karma?
Karma is the currency of StudySoup.
You can buy or earn more Karma at anytime and redeem it for class notes, study guides, flashcards, and more!
Date Created: 02/10/15
PHILOSOPHY DAY 2 January 7 2015 Level Summarize the main points of l each speech Level B What is the philosophical meaning of Alcibiades interruption r does Plato write dialogues instead of direct arguments Level A Plato s characters make explicit various cultural myths and beliefs about love What is the value in focusing on cultural myths Or What cultural myths about love andor sex are prevalent The Origin Of Love Hedwig And The Angry Inch lyrics When the earth was still flat And the clouds madeof re And mountains stretched 11p to the sky Sometimes higher Folks roamed the earth Like big rolling kegs They had twose39ts of arms They had two sets of legs They had two facespeering Ont of One giant head So they could watch all around them As they talked while they read they never knew nothing of love It was before the origin of love The origin of love And there were three sexes then One that looked like two men Glued up back to back cared the children of the sun And similar in shape and girth Were the childrenwof the earth They looked like two girls Rolled up in one And the children of the moon Were like a fork shoved on a spoon They were part sun part earth Part daughter part son The origin of love New the gods grew quite scared Of our strength and defiance And Thor said 39I39m gonna kill them all With my hammer Like 1 killed the giar its But Zeus said 39No You better let me Use my lightening like scissors Like Icutthe legs off the whales And dinosaurs into lizards1 Then he grabbed up some bolts And he let Out a laugh Said I3911 split them right down the middle Gonna cut them right up in half And then storm clouds gathered abOVe Into great balls of fire And then fire shot down From the Sky in bolts Like shining blades Of a knife And it ripped Right through the esh or the children or the sun And the moon And the earth And some Indian god Sewed the wound up into a hole Pulled it round to our belly To remind us of the price we pay And Osiris and the gods of the Nile Gathered up a big storm Toblow a hurricane Toscatter us away a ecd of wind and rain And a sea of tidal waves To wash us away And if we dent behave They ll cut us dOWn again And we39ll be hopping round onone foot And looking through one eye Last time I saw you We had just split in two You were looking at me I was looking at you You had a way so familiar But I could not recognize Cause you had blood on your face I had blood in my eyes But I could Swear by your expression That the pain down in your soul Was the same as the one down in rm39ne That s the pain Cuts a straight line Down through the heart We called it love So we Wrapped our arms around each other Trying to sew ourselves back together We were making love Making love It Was a cold dark evening Sucha long time ago When by the mighty hand of Jove Itwas the sad story How we became Lonely two legfged Creatures It s the storyof The origin of love That39s the origin of love Random Number Generation All our feelings and thoughts ExpreSSed in Ones and in Oughts In endless spiraling chains You cant decode or explain Causeydu are so analog God dog I eye 1 god dog We39re the randOm number generation We are random number generated We are random numbers In the regime of the Solid State Wheels spin when you iterate K is x squared minus one But 54321 When x is taken times two That39s when were Coming for you We39re the randOm number generation We are random number generated We are random numbers Mister Little started something huge Iggy P01312ng Stooge All the children shout out Hey here we are We39re the randOm number generation We are random number generated We are random numbers Parts of speeches are missing and chunks of the piece are missing It was interesting how they all had different ideas On what love is Socrates shuts the guy down that challenges his idea Value is to show there isn t One answer people can haVe different ideas 0n loVe Plato gets to bring up Various prospective on love Strong difference betWeen What they are saying and What they are doing There are two different types of love and you have to look at them differently There are two different goddess who associate With love a younger and older There is love connected to the body and love connected to the soul soul lasts longer and is directed towards Virtue The difference between love and lust The less intelligent one will feel the love because they want the sexual act from the text There s a value distinction between the two loves GOOd Bad Heavenly Common Men Women Soul Body Old Young Wise NaiVe There is a Whole system that comes into the speech Ancient Women Athens of the time were inferior and uneducated except a select few Who were prostitutes who had to be interesting to entertain men Men were married in their early teens No public role for Women Women are the soil man puts the seed into the soil and it grows The child belongs to the father but is born in the mother Women are still undervalued in today s society 59 of college students are female Because We have been taught to think in dichotOmies challenge the binary of the dichotomy Agathon is saying the young beautiful and naiVe is good Socrates supports female empowerment Socrates disrupts the binary but doesn t completely throw it away Radical position at the time What they did back then was more a mentor figure Where today it s two equals coming together Socrates has a Wife but he was talking to his lover The love is the younger male Wanting to obtain knowledge from the older male through sexual actions Its not just that there s mentor equal thing the time they were having these sexual relations they were expected to haVe wives and have mistresses and have intercourse with prostitutes It is not an exclusive relationship notice the naming of all of Socrates beloved The principal of form based in sperm Socrates is a citizen who are the wealthy Greek males from Athens If you are a slave or servant or woman not a citizen If your mother is from another you are not a citizen That was all over PausaniasA Phaedrus believes that love is more of a mental relationship he doesn t speak of lust Love makes you a better person Loving someone and loving him or her passionately makes you a better person The idea that women are supposed to be the mOralitjy police is still around Women are expected to grow up faster even sexually so that they learn to reject sexual advances Is there room in the system for those who don t identify as male or female Aristophanes it was something heard beforenot shocking Deeply rooted in Greek mythology It involves the gods so much it makes it unbelievable Your partner can make you whole as long as you don t have the misconception of them making you perfect If you ve been married a long time you have radically changed yourself from the beginning We live in such an individualistic society If you found your soul mate you found a person who likes the same stuff you do Our Current society places emphasis on online dating i ideal soul mate Having the difference in our personalities is what has been scientifically proven to keep our society alive The customs that separate the two kinds of lovers The original human nature was unity but then they rebelled Humans are too powerful that they had to cut them in half Agathon He s associating the god of love with himself He is young rich powerful arrogant everyone is chasing after him The god of love in his speech looks a lot like Agathon s perception of himself Love is dainty Love is not Violent can t cause any Violence It comes back to love is perfect he is perfect and is not at cause for injustice A world of hurt is coming for Agathon The power of love can conquer anything as an aspiration Ideals matter because you will keep fighting fOr things that you love AgathOn says that yiOu can t force someone to love you and if you are doing it unwillingly you just want to get through it until they realize how great you are it won t werk Can t tolerate injustice Socrates He counters everything Agathon says He proves the statements are logically incorrect He doesn t attack him but explains why he is incorrect We are all here to look for the truth They agree that love is the love of something You want you love what you need not what you already have Love is not in itself beautiful or young Diotima says love is in between good and bad There is some middle position She ruins the dichotomy of what the first people were talking about What makes ignorant ignorant in this picture Only thinking your opinion is right You are sure Diotima explains that men should make an ascent to arrive at the discovery of the Ideal Form of Beauty Men should start with the love of a particular beautiful person The next step is to pass from this particular instance to beauty in general and from physical to moral beauty The fourth step is to attain the love of wisdom and then from this to the appreciation of the absolute and divine beauty She was saying love only is attracted to beautiful things and reproduction is the most beautiful thing so men want reproduction so they have to go through the steps of loving someone first We are trapped in this moment and this decaying body We seek to leave something behind We seek our own mortality People can also seek immortality of ideas If you seek immortality through philosophy that will last forever A child will die a philosophical idea will never die Some express this desire through the body and some express it through the soul by recognizing philosophical ideas by seeking wisdom that can not die You are communing with truth Your soul can be attached to the truth Your body is blocking you from seeing the absolute truth When you take this journey to finding the truth your soul is communing and therefore attached to the truth Truth needs to be ambiguous for us because we are in a physical body and we are trapped by our physical limitations We seek the truth through our knowledge PHILOSOPHY DAY 3 January 12 2015 Questions on Frankqu reading Level C 1 Explain Frankfurt39s arguments about the connection between love and value section 3 Frankfurt believes that there are not reasons to love but that love drives our actions Love is a response or an appreciation and we see this response and appreciation as a value This value appeals to us in some way and a bond is formed that shows love as the final outcome If we find no value we find no love With that said love is not always found in a value that we see or recognize as a value Examples such as smoking chewing and drugs can all be a loved action because the cost of denying oneself of these habits can be too costly to the mental stamina of the body These types of habits hold no value but are loved by some We might find ourselves believing people and objects as being unworthy of our love Maybe you have had a friend that turned out to not be a friend by actions that were exchanged or values that did not believe in You see this friendship as a hardship and feel that this person is not worthy of your love The connection between love and value is an individualized process and doesn t always mean if you have one you have the other We love to love and see our survival as finding and holding onto love which is the natural response to our survival In order to love living you have to find value in people places and things Why is loving important to us sections 7 amp 8 Loving is important to us because it provides goals for us to attain and final ends to achieve When you become a parent you create goals for yourself that will help to form and mold your child into a happy positive child and a successful member of society When your child turns into an adult and leaves the home you hope that they will take the foundation that you instilled in them into the world When you buy that cute little puppy dog that you immediately fell in love with at the dog pound you set goals and objectives on potty training walking on a leash and having good manners that you hope your dog will have in a few years Whether a child or a dog you have a beginning and final ends as adulthood is reached The beginning is the love and caring and the end is the satisfaction and pleasure you receive with success Level B 1 Frankfurt claims that love is the source of reasons and practical rationality Are you convinced by his argument Why or why not I am not convinced by Frankfurt s claim that love is the source of reasons and practical rationality One good example is what seems to be on the news almost daily Love drives the actions of the terrorists who believe and love their faith and their country We believe that these terrorists are crazy and irrational people The terrorists see themselves as loyal fighters for what they love We find these acts as unthinkable but those that commit these acts must feel that they are responding in a sane way to actions that had been taken upon them Susan Smith who in 1995 was sentenced to life in prison for killing her two children for the sake of love for her boyfriend is a prime example of irrational love She felt so much love for this person that she would not allow anyone to interfere even her own children There is no practical rationality in this tragic circumstance I believe that love is like a handprint There are traits that are the same for many but there are those small differences and characteristics that are unique to each individual Level A 1 Can you live a full human life with value and dignity without love I do not believe you can live a full human life with value and dignity without love Although it is possible to find value without love and live a dignified life life would not be human without love Love is the backbone of society Without love there would be hate and fear Love allows us to feel happiness find our own selfworth project a positive in uence and give ourselves to others Without love life would be boring and our mental stability would be void of quality and meaning There would be so many feelings that one would not feel You would not be able to find that overall excitement when you see a loved one hug that special dog or do something kind Love is a necessity for a happy life with human values 2 Emotion and reason are usually contrasted If Frankfurt is right what does this mean for how we approach education If love is the source of rationality and we usually teach people to approach learning objectively without emotion what are the implications Frankfurt s idea on the emotion of love is that love is based on value or the perceived worth of an individual It is this value that we become emotionally connected with a person and we continue to love the person The emotion is a rational response even though the value may not be immediately recognized Education is built on objectivity and without emotion With education described in this way there is no emotion attached to learning Without emotion there is no desire to learn and to better ourselves Learning becomes a boring requirement of life that individuals may fail since there is no emotional incentive attached to the learning When there is no learning life will stand still and there will be no advancement or change What is Plato doing Love is a guide to living well avoiding shame Socrates is the only man in the world who has made me feel shameless pg 29 Heavenly love is you love for the sake of virtue together Common is what we would consider today as lust Aristophanes is talking about the two people that want to become one This image of two people becoming one they don t become one Sometimes the love is not reciprocated Socrates has this idea that when you start loving one body you will love all bodies and then you will catch sight of beauty itself What is Plato doing Every argument has a counterargument we have to decide what we want to believe He is making the Cultural mythologies and ideas explicit through the characters Alcibiades comes in and does a drunken speech Willing to come in and profess his love He is the one in love Socrates is the ideal lover in the sense that he is idealist The meat and bones of love is Alcibiades Aporia when you come to a point at which what you thought doesn t work You try out an argument you come to a contradiction something is wrong with that argument The aporia coming to this place Where I knew what love was based on culture TV relatives I have idea of what love is supposed to be Every single person s argument is challenged in the piece Is Plato making an argument about what love actually is He talks about what love isn t He is making explicit all these cultural myths and then explainng why they would work Outside this class Socrates is the example of What love should be and Alcibiades you can believe what you want about that If you don t think about love you will just act it out If this is What love is supposed to be you go along with it If dad beats my mom then it s okay If you don t challenge the model you grew up then you don t get to make the decision for yourself You are uneritically picking it up and go along with it Every single one of the arguments comes to an aporia In order to do philosophy you have to clear away all the baggage does Plato write dialogues instead of direct arguments Reading dialogues can be more relatable than direct arguments If you just read an argument it is mostly right or wrong While reading dialogues there is more leeway Arguments can become defensiVe where as dialogues can open you up Number 1 You don t get the defensive oh I m right you re wrong Number It makes you think through it for yourself Helps you gain a better understanding of it is what it is It has to do with when you have to think for yourself and you see lots of opinions and you have to come to your own conclusion you are closer to the truth It is easier to agree with the popular belief than to go on your own and make your own choice People just want their beliefs validated Having to something new is scary We as people have a confirmation bias we always want to be around people who have the same thoughts as use Open dialogues cause people to admit they are wrong which they don t like to do Find a cultural myth 0n love sex or gender explain it and put it up for debate Ideas Teen pregnaIICy music on hooking up our generation is into eaSUal sex Woman are interested in climbing up the social ranks instead of falling in love They care less about loyalty and more about money and status Loyalty within hiphop and a lot of rappers sing of gold diggers All women are gold diggers Women aren t trustworthy Anything we say doesn t matter No means no Consent WQmen say no they aren t trustworthy and they don t know what they want Underlying argument loyalty What we are saying by the Chris Brown song is that women aren t trusted which is shown through their actions Many hip hop songs say that women aren t trustworthy and they don t know what they want The way this cultural myth has manifested through society is through the lack of consent and men raping women PHILOSOPHY DAY 4 January 14 25015 Is it ethical to give preference in certain situations to people I love and have a relationShip with Throughout the history of philosophy it has been considered unethical to give preference If you save your mother because of love instead of another man you are acting unethicaflly Medieval modern contemporary until now it has been considered unethical When can I behave with preference Son is drowningsave himethical Son is in this classgive him test questionsunethical is the set of principals that allow you to save your son but not save him in class Saving him in class would help him get into grad school Bernard Williams argues that if you haVe to justify saving your wife in a burning building you have already had one thought too many Frankfurt explains why its one thought too many He argues love is the source of ethics He argues that you cannot live well withoutthat love therefore protecting it is allowable and the only real thing to do Example Famous thought eXperiment trolley Say that you are at a train track and you see a group of preschoolers standing on a bridge on the tracks exploring the world and they have come on this trolley track Then you see coming in the distance the trolley The preschoolers do not have enough time to get off the tracks However you have access to switch the track to move the trolley except it will hit another man or woman on the other side Who do you pick Almost always people say to ip the switch Example There no switch however if you push a fat person off the bridge it will derail the trolley and save the preschoolers Alrnost always people say don t push the obese person Partiality vs impartiality Have a special person in your life They are in a burning building along with the teacher Justify saving the person you love without saving the teacher without using love as a reason The point is you have two equivalent people Now justify saying the person using love It captures how powerful love is It can be a whole reason to save someone P1 P2 P3 C First thing is identifying the issue what are they about what is at stake It s important to look at the issue first or you will be drawn into their argument in their terms It allows you to be objective about the author s stand What claim are they making For an argument you need at least one premise Look at section 339 nd a conclusion and list the premises Frankfurt claims that you love someone because you value something they offer However you grow to love them as you learn what value they have Some cases you love before you even know their values such as a newborn child Loving someone that has no value is possible yet a misfortune Love is not grounded in value but value may be a contributor to love What 8 the issue About the value of something in comparison to the love it receives The issue was how love affects the beloved Do we value things because we love them or do we love things because we value them Some of these aren t issues but claimsA is the difference between the ones crossed out the ones left The Ones left above state what we are talking about How love affects the beloved is too and too broad Which comes first the value or the love only Captures of the issue quotWhy would we love is not the primary issue it s too broad Do we value things because we love them or do we love things because We value them is close but it narrows the question down just a little bit more than the others Not a thesis statement you do not need the issue to be narrow Conclusion LOVe is not grounded in value of the beloVed but love necessarily makes the beloved Valuable Intrinsic value vs instrumental value Love in itself justi es itself First Premise second paragraph Love does not always arise coming from the inherent Value Second Premise What we love acquires value for us because of our love His children acquired love from him not from their value but from his love Third Premise pg 39 The question of whether someone is worthy of love is misguided He shows that it is misguided If that question Were not misguided then value would come first Fourth Premise The particular value is not inherent in the children but comes from his love Fifth Premise This relation holds for love in general you have an argument the rst step to analyze the argument is look for a counterargument Sometimes it is an inductive argument You need one example Where you love something and you genuinely love something but you do not value it PHILOSOPHY DAY 5 January 21 2015 Frankart is an interesting character cause he contrasts to other pieces Frankfurt Works against you of EurOpean morality it is grounded in the church or religion Kant time religion is not so stable Science is more favorable Where is the room forv39free will Without free will morality is in danger Kant deals with the metaphysical grounding for Christian morality outside of the church Kant wants to ground morality he does it through apriority reason This is reason you could think about with no experience in the World Comes up with absolute grounding for morality that holds for all people of all kind He thinks that all ethics is based on reason For Kant love is empirica1 Love is something based on individual whims that is subjects to the mechanisms of science Frankfurt responds to Kant with the practical rationality in love He is saying love isn t essentially how you feel about someone Is that what the culture tells you No love is emotional and feeling He means that you will the geod for someone You want good things to happen for them Volition means you are willing to act on it To will something have the ability to act on it and not you did not will it This is not Voluntary Can you step willing on demand You can steer it Alcoholics can t just stop Willing the desire for alcohol ne of 39 the issues with having this ultimate outside reason if that s the good What motivates you to actually go for it What s going to motivate you to act Inherent value Inherent value vs instrumental value Most people are not going to act differently unless you can Show them how it matters to their life Grounding practical rationality on some inherent value outside of this world has a problem cause it can t motivate action Kant thinks you should act from duty alone Anything you do that has some personal motivation that is not a moral action according to Kant If it is from your inclinations and the world you did not choose so you cannot be praised Submitting to that absolute pure reason the only time you are free to making your own decisions according to Kant Kant is in a time of social unrest if all the morality that you grew up with was from the church and now the church is at risk it cannot be used for morality Kant is trying to defend and safe morality Kant says you always have to treat each person as a human being you can never treat any human being as a means to your ends you cannot push that person because you are using that person as a mere means For Kant the right is prior to the good Rationality requires that if you value your own rationality you have to value everyone 5 rationality Where Kant comes to is appealing He has a lot of power Frankfort still engaging in Kant shows you there is still something of value that Kant saying It is the right thing to do if you have no way to save them that doesn t involve something else Pull out a problem here Start to be critical of the work Love is selfish love sel ess If your identity depends on that person they screw you over which is probably going to happen you don t just lose that person and relationship you lose yourself Maybe you aren t becoming your Own PETSOHQ you are a re39 eCtiOn of them He makes a claim like a lover identifies with the person he loves When you see a bold claim if that s true what are the implications what problems could that cause Do you have to in order for it to be love Do you have to make yourself vulnerable in order to love If you are always guarding yourself you are not opening yourself to that person Frankfurt thinks you have to risk in order for it to be love When your pet dies it s a risk of pain To love is to allow the possibility of the risk You are more valuable to me If your priority is protecting yourself you can t call it love cause your interests are still Aristotle saying everyone you love has some sort of purpose your life Three types of friendship Friendship of utility People basically use each other to get somewhere Unstable As soon as they are beneficial to you go Accountable Consistent Accommodating Friendship for pleasure Ex Enjoy Company Common Interests Good Listener Comfortable To Be With Friendship of good people who wish good for each other grounded on virtue Ex Respect Kind Loyal Grounding Objective Unconditional Love Forgiving Supportive Accepting Understanding Common Morals Accountable Honesty Caring Trustworthy Good Listener Accommodating A good friend has virtues Aristotle thinks in contrast to Frankfurt who thinks love can come from source that doesn t lie on preexisting virtue Aristotle thinks preexisting virtue is what maintains friendship that grows into love friendship continue to exist among people who are not equal According to Aristotle When friends are separated through a gap of inequality they cant be friends Without equality true friendship is not possible Social hierarchies can be different as long as the friendship is based on equality In an unequal relationship the person Who is in the lower position should love more That creates Virtue in that person that person is more excellent in the Virtue of friendship so the friendship involves3 equality Aristotle didn t think little of himself He says the better or more superior person should be loved more because of the question of virtue It raises the lower person up because of the Virtue He clearly contradicts the idea of unecnditional love For Aristotle love is based on Virtue If the person becomes corrupt they are not worthy of arfriendship It would be bad for you to hang out with them Aristotle s argument thought women were deformities and he did not have attering things to say What happens to that section in his argument There are still social inequalities We are willing to say we are better people than other people Kant has a different take on inequality We still have this concept that friends should be based on some kind of quotVirtueSir Kant wants to maintain inequalities between men and women Four different types of Philosophy Analytical Frank irt thought experiments conceptual analysis necessary and sufficient ConditiOI IS clarity precision Continental political engagement Marxism lot of psychoanalytical in uences literature phenomenology American Pragmatism Cultural criticism break binaries Feminism question power structures believe gender has an impact on perspective Analytical hate continental and continental hate analytical PHILOSOPHY DAY January 2639 2015 Pausanias sex is a lesser inferior type of love Secrates way to achieve immortality Aristophanes seeking unity with beloved Augustine shameful if you feel lust the only purpose for Augustine is procreation The appropriate thing for his time back then Even if you are married it is shameful to feel lustlove when you are engaging activity Adam and Eve was a fall not something good that they did His argument had a lot of holes oh well we probably would have procreated anyway Argument from ignorance He Was talking about if your children can t witness it then its shameful or if you have to hide it from the public it is shameful Sex wasn t seen today we have porn they did too He Was saying you could will yourself not to lust when not sad ability to control your lust His main argument is that you would feel lust in your body parts even though its not in your mind He talks of struggle in lust that took him Shame about sex and the body itself You go on any Website that has a comment on abortion and you are going to get slut shaming PHILOSOPHY DAY January 28 201539 Paper due in 2 weeks you have to have a thesis nd a good role model of love and compare it to one of the works you have read For Aristotle women are defected men Women are failed men Kant argues against that For Kant it is not a matter of V insuperiority and superiority it is a compliment Two half s of the same Whole Women aren t inferior except in certain categories Related to that men are inferior in other categories We could call it benevolent sexism today Kant was well aWare of Woman s debates of society at the time How does this clear mistake show up elsewhere Have Kant reading finished by Monday PHILOSOPHY DAY 8 February 2 2015 The Who in Kant He says there are two moral standards that are different Women are supposed to be beautiful and all the things that they do should contribute to the ultimate standard of beauty Men can appreciate beauty but it should go to their overall nobility Aristotle had one standard women were defected men Kant is trying to defend women He actually thinks that the men who hate women want them to be like men What he thinks women are is what society has forced them to be Seek to be 39W Ol th rather than be Well known For Kant he only cares about the intention but not the consequence How does Kant defend his argument The Christian values go hand in hand with Kant Catholic church relies on this type of reasoning to take up their position Kant himself does not defend his argument on the basis of Christianity He tries to justify the Christianity Ways without referencing Christianity There are two sorts of human beings a natural state Here we have a nice little trap This is a form of reasoning currently you are going to see it a lot in the remnants of the debate over gay marriage So we will be dealing with this in the next section of the course So I ve got nature What can you do about it Its just nature That is what is natural Say there is madema dacieair What happens there It is a no true Scotsman Even if they pretend to be associated it they aren t really associated with it Any woman that is smart a no true woman Her identity is also to relation to the man He is the individual She becomes a more perfect wife He becomes the perfect man It is a fairly radical statement It is an argument against the inferiority superiority argument PHILOSOPHY DAY 10 Class 9 was canceled February 939 2015 How did theories of love and sex and gender effect colonization F10res is how that legacy is playing out today Notes on Beauvoir She s asking this question women have just gotten the vote in France a couple years prior are the justifications as why women be subordinate She says woman always came from man in religion Basically the first part of the text is called justi cations So there are a lot of stories that have been put forth about why women are put in a subordinate position Part one destiny Genealogy so one thing that really works to reinforce power structures in inequality is to make them seem natural Nature has instituted this distinction between man and woman Beauvoir takes this history and goes back and looks at it to look f0r it to be a justification of this inequality She says it is not natural not right N ext she turns to another practice phenomenology So then she takes up these experiemes what is the effect that it has had on people She interviewed peeple and used her own experience How has this justi cation played out in the lives of contemporary women Ambiguity so this is a term Beauvoir uses to characterize the human condition People are all made up of two opposing states Situation set of givens that you are born into that set into your life as you grow things you do not control cultural biological and Transcendent meaning no one can give you the meaning of your life no one can tell you the value or priorities of your life Beauvoir says to be human is to take up your situation acknowledge the givens and to make meaning out of it You have to have both to be authentic human being Acrwrding to Beauvoir something has gone wrong in culture Men are assigned the transcendent category they get to ignore their biology Women are stuck with biology and are doomed by their society and culture Their meaning is set from the get go They are going to be Wives and mothers Their meaning will come through by attaching themselves to their male partner So lookng at the introduction So we have gotten into essentialism So what it is to be a women is to have these set criteria That is what defines the essential woman Things like nurturing or maternal or charming beautiful So what is the problem she identifies She says it is in jeopardy because women have to say we are women If there was actually an eternal feminine how could thatbe in jeopardy If it is natural and truly just nature and a part of the deepest most inherent nature of what it is to be a woman how could that be in jeopardy If it were natural you would not need the policing mechanisms Page 4 what does it mean to be a woman It is not so easy to throw everything aside to be a man A woman is not just a defected And you can t just throw everything it means to be a woman aside to be a man In our society men are more Violent and quarrelsome Some days a month women are bitchy cause they act like men for a couple of days She takes up these arguments in nice moments in her piece haVen t women overcome this position She has seen the other but she has not seen from the perspective of it being western civilization women haven t challenged The other is like in groupout group High school sports There s the rival team In the 60 and 3970 movements men were over the stage and speaking for women so it failed By abstract equality In our society today we might say women have abstract equality in jobs in philosophy There are no concrete or legal barriers to getting a job or degree somewhere Concrete equality are barriers that are set up for women in society Women are getting about equal on the stem bachelor degrees but not going further Stereotype threat is common in testing Women are expected to do the care giving We don t have a neutral position on what to speak Men are neutral they are not women so they are Objective Beauvoir says that its true women are not objective about who they are but men are not objective either When you are born and you are from a certain city and religion you claim yourself If you were to claim that women were the main subjects you would have to reject the other groups Women are so dispersed everywhere they cannot just rebel against men of it that if you are a girl you are more likely to relate to a guy that you grew up with than a Woman across the nation with the same gender as you We haVe a dispersal so city X and city says I m essential Y says I m essential They battle against each other is easy to do Lots of Y supporters You do not have to cut ties with all your other Y s to challenge the X s If you are in another situation where the supporters are connected you just gather up your buddies and go to war because it is a civil war It is an issue Another issue is the complicity This isn t just men against women Women have to give up being the wife or daughter of a man A lot of What Beauvoir is saying is that there is a temptation on both sides Temptation for women to stay in the given it justifies your life because I can be a woman and a mother A lot of women justify their lives through motherhood Both sexes are being inauthentic might men run away from the given If there were enough for every man Why would they keep pushing Men are not all equally privileged There s a vulnerability that they have to escape If you admit the vulnerability and you don t have the excuse of being a woman you are at greater risk in the society Inauthenticity is when you reject your ambiguity as a human being is the impact of love The take home message There is a possibility of an authentic love Inauthentic love In order to get access to get the other side of live they will try to find meaning through the other person To reject the lack limitation She talks about it as a seeking of salvation In order to be necessary to the man she has to create his need for her When he is satis ed she is not necessary Every lapse of attention is a threat to her need If you are forcing someone to need you or want you then it isn t real and you feel the inauthentieity Beauvoir creates a god As soon as the god becomes mortal as soon as the man is mortal shows weakness he is no longer a god and can tjustify her or himself he is less than human happens to people who are in a relationship and break It is all consuming For the man in this relationship the Woman is like not an individual she is a position or role She seeking recognition from him He is treating her like the biological given All Women are the same She is not a unique individual unless she takes up her ambiguity He can replace her The moment of realization Wonderful person the instant the breakup becomes a possibility they become horrible It is not that they have aws and we didn t work out It is he is the scum of the earth Human beings cannot tolerate it when things do not make sense would an authentic love be for Beauvoir It is going to be between ambiguous people You recognize that you are a human being and so are they They do not give up the meaning of their own lives Instead of giving up yourself you reveal your transcendence and your givens and you can build projects together Projects being the way in which you justify your life your goals Where is Kant showing up in this Kant talks how there are two halves to the same whole Kant is the one who tries to find a woman based on a man You don t need a man to define a woman for who she is He says how woman have this beauty and Virtue When it comes to the lived experiences of individuals there are consequences that are damaging for men and women The man has to maintain a god role Financial meaning the stresses of the external role Women never get to fulfill their full potential Women never give themselves their own meaning They cannot mutilate themselves to go beyond what the man Wants
Are you sure you want to buy this material for
You're already Subscribed!
Looks like you've already subscribed to StudySoup, you won't need to purchase another subscription to get this material. To access this material simply click 'View Full Document'