Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

women philosophers


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#16    markdohle

markdohle

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,894 posts
  • Joined:21 May 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Atlanta area

Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:45 PM

View Postredhen, on 10 February 2013 - 06:21 AM, said:

Ah yes, my mistake, I was thinking of the "Little flower".  Anyways, that list includes Saint Hildegard, Saint Teresia Benedicta of the Cross (aka Edith Stein), and various Catholic nuns. I would hazard a guess that any philosophy they undertook would have to fall in line with Roman Catholic orthodoxy. So, not exactly free thinkers.

I think the term 'free thinker' is misused.  It does not mean that people think for themselves, but rather take a certain thread in philosphy and religion that is bit off the beaten path (which in point of fact, is not longer true).....but within that path, they pretty much say the same thing, a lot of good things, in which the more conventional could learn somthing and the opposite is true as well.  Any tradition, if truly studied and tried in to be lived in the arena of life will bear the same fruits I believe.  A certain amount of trust in ones ability to think for themselves is needed.  In both orthodox groups as well as free thinkers, those who think our side the lines are often ignorned, or worse insulted.

peace
Mark

Edited by markdohle, 10 February 2013 - 05:46 PM.


#17    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 14,852 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 10 February 2013 - 05:49 PM

One way to become a famous philosopher is to come up with something really strange but just credible enough to cause people to pause.  Then you get quoted all over the place by those rushing to refute you.  Anselm is no doubt the best example of that, but Plato and Pythagoras and Aquinas and Descartes and Spinoza and Leibniz and Hegel and Nietzsche and Freud and Marx and  . . ..


#18    redhen

redhen

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,825 posts
  • Joined:14 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Samsara

Posted 10 February 2013 - 08:26 PM

View Postmarkdohle, on 10 February 2013 - 05:45 PM, said:

A certain amount of trust in ones ability to think for themselves is needed.  In both orthodox groups as well as free thinkers, those who think our side the lines are often ignored, or worse insulted.

Yes that's what I meant. Specifically given the context of medieval Europe, where such thinking could get you censored, or executed.  This of course was backed up by Catholic philosophy at the time, espoused famously (infamously?) by Saint Thomas Aquinas;

"On the part of the Church, however, there is mercy which looks to the conversion of the wanderer, wherefore she condemns not at once, but "after the first and second admonition," as the Apostle directs: after that, if he is yet stubborn, the Church no longer hoping for his conversion, looks to the salvation of others, by excommunicating him and separating him from the Church, and furthermore delivers him to the secular tribunal to be exterminated thereby from the world by death."

Nice.


#19    HDesiato

HDesiato

    Apparition

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • 293 posts
  • Joined:18 Jun 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pennsylvania

Posted 10 February 2013 - 09:01 PM

(Feeling like a little fish here.)
I've only heard of one name on that list: Ayn Rand.
It's been... decades since I've read any of her work.
Anthem
The Fountainhead
Atlas Shrugged
The Virtue Of Selfishness
Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal

In fact I never thought of it but I guess she was a philosopher.
I've read mostly excerpts of the classic (male) philosophers but I guess the most captivating on the subject happenned to be female.
Thanks for the link btw!




#20    Norbert Dentressangle

Norbert Dentressangle

    A bit dull

  • Member
  • 26,478 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tanybwlch

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 10 February 2013 - 09:13 PM

View Postredhen, on 10 February 2013 - 04:41 AM, said:



p.s. Theresa of Avila, um, make that Saint Theresa is one of several "philosophers" on that wiki page you have. There's a couple more Roman Catholic mystics and Saints on that page. Yes, I guess you could call them philosophers, but they really are looking at things through a coloured lens.

View Postmarkdohle, on 10 February 2013 - 05:39 PM, said:

We all look at things through colored lenses my friend, we each have our own perspective, also the culture we grew up in etc.  The perspective of many saints if actually followed, at least in how we relate to one another, would probably change the world for the better.  I am not just talking about Christians saints either, but mystics from all traditions.  I am not sure a purely secular world is possible nor desireable......I just want the two seperated, when governmets and religion get into bed, they have some pretty violent off spring.  Off course each does pretty good on their own as well ;-(.

peace
mark
without a doubt, religious people were the philosophers of the Middle Ages; they were usually the only ones who were literate, for a start. It can be easy to say "well, if someone was religious, then they couldn't be free thinkers and would have to follow dogma" and so on, but the people who say that are the ones who don't know anything about the vast variety of Christian mysticism and the enormous range of different schools of thought. And that's before we start to consider Islamic (particularly Sufi) mysticism; Jewish mysticism (particularly Hasidic), all the enromous range of Eastern religions and so on.  So I really don't think "philosophers" need to be qualfiied with inverted commas when talking about people who are now regarded as saints.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


:cat:


#21    markdohle

markdohle

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,894 posts
  • Joined:21 May 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Atlanta area

Posted 10 February 2013 - 09:53 PM

View Postredhen, on 10 February 2013 - 08:26 PM, said:

Yes that's what I meant. Specifically given the context of medieval Europe, where such thinking could get you censored, or executed.  This of course was backed up by Catholic philosophy at the time, espoused famously (infamously?) by Saint Thomas Aquinas;

"On the part of the Church, however, there is mercy which looks to the conversion of the wanderer, wherefore she condemns not at once, but "after the first and second admonition," as the Apostle directs: after that, if he is yet stubborn, the Church no longer hoping for his conversion, looks to the salvation of others, by excommunicating him and separating him from the Church, and furthermore delivers him to the secular tribunal to be exterminated thereby from the world by death."

Nice.


Well today that is not even considered acceptable.  Societies, religions and peoples do mature; well they do if they survive.  It is not quite fair to judge other times by our standards, which by the way, on only given honor by our words, our actions suggest otherwise.  In reality all groups have all the same types of people, none are better, at least on a moral level than any other when history is considered and studied.  We are a primitive people, still tribal and very fearful of outsiders.  Go to some atheist sites and you will see what I mean.  Atheist and SOME freethinkers have just as much hatred and vitriol towards others as any group.  Perhaps when we learn to not try to have contempt on those different than us, we may make some progress, but I doubt it, sad to say.  I struggle with it, I am still a primitive, and my faith encourages me to grow out of that with the help of God's grace.

Peace
Mark



#22    redhen

redhen

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,825 posts
  • Joined:14 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Samsara

Posted 10 February 2013 - 11:13 PM

View PostLord Vetinari, on 10 February 2013 - 09:13 PM, said:

without a doubt, religious people were the philosophers of the Middle Ages; they were usually the only ones who were literate, for a start.

Sure, back then theology was the queen of the sciences.

Quote

It can be easy to say "well, if someone was religious, then they couldn't be free thinkers and would have to follow dogma"

yup, it was easy.

Quote

and so on, but the people who say that are the ones who don't know anything about the vast variety of Christian mysticism and the enormous range of different schools of thought.

try me

Quote

And that's before we start to consider Islamic (particularly Sufi) mysticism; Jewish mysticism (particularly Hasidic), all the enromous range of Eastern religions and so on.  So I really don't think "philosophers" need to be qualfiied with inverted commas when talking about people who are now regarded as saints.

Yes, that's my point, all these medieval philosophers are religious. They start out with a priori knowledge of God. That's not truthseeking in the modern sense of philosophy. The word has had several denotations'

"The definition of the word "philosophy" in English has changed over the centuries. In medieval times, any research outside the fields of theology or medicine was called "philosophy","


#23    redhen

redhen

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 2,825 posts
  • Joined:14 Aug 2005
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Samsara

Posted 10 February 2013 - 11:19 PM

View Postmarkdohle, on 10 February 2013 - 09:53 PM, said:

Well today that is not even considered acceptable.  Societies, religions and peoples do mature; well they do if they survive.


Well put.

Quote

It is not quite fair to judge other times by our standards, which by the way, on only given honor by our words, our actions suggest otherwise.


Yes, I'm not attacking any of these respected thinkers. I'm just pointing out the restrictions they lived in.

Quote

  In reality all groups have all the same types of people, none are better, at least on a moral level than any other when history is considered and studied.  We are a primitive people, still tribal and very fearful of outsiders.  Go to some atheist sites and you will see what I mean.  Atheist and SOME freethinkers have just as much hatred and vitriol towards others as any group.  Perhaps when we learn to not try to have contempt on those different than us, we may make some progress, but I doubt it, sad to say.  I struggle with it, I am still a primitive, and my faith encourages me to grow out of that with the help of God's grace.

Yes, that's why I singled out Hypatia and the growing trend by militant atheists to co-opt her for their "cause".

Perhaps if we had more female philosophers, the world would be a better place?


#24    markdohle

markdohle

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,894 posts
  • Joined:21 May 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Atlanta area

Posted 10 February 2013 - 11:36 PM

View Postredhen, on 10 February 2013 - 11:19 PM, said:

[/font][/color]

Well put.



Yes, I'm not attacking any of these respected thinkers. I'm just pointing out the restrictions they lived in.

[color=#222222][font=Arial]

Yes, that's why I singled out Hypatia and the growing trend by militant atheists to co-opt her for their "cause".

Perhaps if we had more female philosophers, the world would be a better place?

I agree, more women thinkers would add a needed balance.  Though Ayn Rand would be an exception.  I did read all of her works when young and liked them.  Her novels, not so much, but other works had something to offer.  However her system is too air tight and she is really a man in how she thinks and works her thoughts out.  Also, while she was very rational, she was unreasonable, her life was in chaos.

peace
mark


#25    markdohle

markdohle

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 4,894 posts
  • Joined:21 May 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Atlanta area

Posted 10 February 2013 - 11:38 PM

View PostLord Vetinari, on 10 February 2013 - 09:13 PM, said:

without a doubt, religious people were the philosophers of the Middle Ages; they were usually the only ones who were literate, for a start. It can be easy to say "well, if someone was religious, then they couldn't be free thinkers and would have to follow dogma" and so on, but the people who say that are the ones who don't know anything about the vast variety of Christian mysticism and the enormous range of different schools of thought. And that's before we start to consider Islamic (particularly Sufi) mysticism; Jewish mysticism (particularly Hasidic), all the enromous range of Eastern religions and so on.  So I really don't think "philosophers" need to be qualfiied with inverted commas when talking about people who are now regarded as saints.

Very well put, thank you.

peace
mark


#26    Norbert Dentressangle

Norbert Dentressangle

    A bit dull

  • Member
  • 26,478 posts
  • Joined:09 May 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tanybwlch

  • Vampires are people too.

Posted 11 February 2013 - 07:45 AM

View Postredhen, on 10 February 2013 - 11:13 PM, said:

Sure, back then theology was the queen of the sciences.



yup, it was easy.



try me



Yes, that's my point, all these medieval philosophers are religious. They start out with a priori knowledge of God. That's not truthseeking in the modern sense of philosophy. The word has had several denotations'

"The definition of the word "philosophy" in English has changed over the centuries. In medieval times, any research outside the fields of theology or medicine was called "philosophy","
There's absolutely no point trying to argue about it, is there, and I find interminable arguments insufferably tedious. It would be nice, though, if people were willing to admit that not all people who are or were "Religious" are or were necessarily brainwashed drones who aren't interested in seeking the Truth, but I don't suppose that's very likely to happen.

Life is a hideous business, and from the background behind what we know of it peer daemoniacal hints of truth which make it sometimes a thousandfold more hideous.

H. P. Lovecraft.


:cat:


#27    No-thingBornPassion

No-thingBornPassion

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,358 posts
  • Joined:16 Jan 2012
  • Gender:Not Selected

  • (Christian) Gnosticism also has the Holy Spirit, Christ(os), Jesus, LOVE...and God. Father, as the "Dazzling Darkness."

Posted 25 February 2013 - 11:49 AM

View Postmarkdohle, on 10 February 2013 - 05:45 PM, said:

Any tradition, if truly studied and tried in to be lived in the arena of life will bear the same fruits I believe.
Hello Mark,

If one's afterlife destination (i.e. "Christian paradise/heaven," for example) were the standard of judgement or criterion, one wouldn't be able to say that. I thought Catholics see this world as ephemeral and long to be with Christ in paradise:

"...to thee do we cry, poor banished children of Eve; to thee do we send up our sighs, mourning and weeping in this vale of tears; turn, then most gracious Advocate, thine eyes of mercy towards us, and after this, our exile..." (Hail Holy Queen Prayer)

Just thinking about your post, Mark.


Peace.

Paul

https://www.youtube....ix3pVUX86yBWWzS  (playlist )    https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100008232820397

According to Gnosticism, Christ came to world to give us a way out; so, why is Gnosticism so secretive and elitist when it comes to salvation??
“Moses approached the dark cloud where God was.”

#28    Frank Merton

Frank Merton

    Blue fish

  • Member
  • 14,852 posts
  • Joined:22 Jan 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

  • fmerton.blogspot.com

Posted 25 February 2013 - 12:00 PM

We are all products of our time and place.  I figure had I lived in Victorian England I would have been as sexist and prudish as they were, had I lived in early twentieth century Vietnam I would have been persuaded and become CaoDai, and so on.

Thus it behooves us to not be too critical of our ancestors for views they held that we now dismiss or even detest.  It also causes us to pray that posterity will be similarly generous to us.

That most discoveries in the past were by men and women were relegated to other roles is a simple fact, to be attributed to different times and places.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users