tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9987513.post1429389898456766048..comments2024-03-17T11:05:22.464+00:00Comments on The Life And Opinions of Andrew Rilstone: "Jeffcotism is invading all forms of discourse and rendering rational discussion impossible." Discuss. (2)Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger7125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9987513.post-55076268912746776822021-06-20T16:03:42.803+01:002021-06-20T16:03:42.803+01:00When people first started making these comparisons...When people first started making these comparisons between racial identity and gender identity my response was to say they are alike in many ways, but actually because both are to a large extent social constructs. A few years ago I invited a Muslim Shaykh to speak to some students. He was of Gujarati Indian origin and explained that when he lived in Egypt he was classed as white but when he came to the UK he was classed as black. So whether he was seen as black or white did not depend on the colour of his skin but on how people were choosing to see him. In the Southern USA of the nineteenth century a person with a single black great grandparent would be classed as black. So there are situations where a person who did not have black skin would find themselves regarded as black. Some people of Indian origin do opt for a black identity, some want to see their selves as distinct from that. <br /><br />Mrs. Sartre pointed out that one is not born a woman, one becomes one. Gender identity is to a large extent socially constructed. It's not that racial identity has nothing to do with the colour of your skin or that gender identity has nothing to do with what genitalia you have, but there is more to it in both cases and the two cases are more similar than may first appear. <br /><br />Discusspostodavehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18402698812156032820noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9987513.post-29871645386151941622021-06-16T22:21:07.731+01:002021-06-16T22:21:07.731+01:00One pound is a lovely amount of money to be giving...One pound is a lovely amount of money to be giving me per post. So is one dollar, or any other amount. Thank you very much indeed. Andrew Rilstonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16934052271846235431noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9987513.post-4759095224698167482021-06-16T21:10:53.047+01:002021-06-16T21:10:53.047+01:00One dollar and forty-two cents = one pound? What i...One dollar and forty-two cents = one pound? What if I'm already giving you one pound per post via Patreon (which is actually the case)?Irinahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14642773658250148435noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9987513.post-49608313970709575682021-05-31T20:00:46.456+01:002021-05-31T20:00:46.456+01:00By the way, in A Brief History of Time, Stephen Ha...By the way, in A Brief History of Time, Stephen Hawking made the exact same mistake so you're in good company.Andrew Stevenshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13453328821252013152noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9987513.post-62903165613399834672021-05-30T18:35:50.505+01:002021-05-30T18:35:50.505+01:00Aristotle honestly thought that you could work out...<i>Aristotle honestly thought that you could work out how many teeth a horse had from first principles: it didn't occur to him to go and count them.</i><br /><br />A mild correction. Plato could probably be justly accused of this, but not Aristotle. Aristotle was much more empirical than almost anyone else in the Greek Enlightenment. The medieval commentators described Aristotle's philosophy as "Nihil in intellectu nisi prius fuerit in sensu." ("Nothing in the intellect without first being in the senses.")<br /><br />Aristotle was wrong about a whole lot of biology. He did say, for example, that women had fewer teeth than men. But he almost certainly believed this <i>because</i> he went about counting them. <a href="https://johnhawks.net/weblog/topics/history/aristotle_wisdom_teeth.html" rel="nofollow">See here.</a> It is fashionable nowadays to claim that Aristotle just didn't bother to count, but it's clear in the passage that he <i>did</i>. He just got it wrong (and probably for reasons of third molar eruption, as Mr. Hawks speculates in the link). <br /><br />Aristotle is actually quite fascinating even on matters of biology since we can see an extremely powerful empirical intellect and the limitations that are placed on such by the ancient lack of access to modern tools (e.g. microscopes).Andrew Stevenshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13453328821252013152noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9987513.post-53415393755139413002021-05-30T07:41:18.135+01:002021-05-30T07:41:18.135+01:00Javelin and Shot-Put are the only legitimate forms...Javelin and Shot-Put are the only legitimate forms of throwing sports. Discus?Richard Worthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09025201422909987658noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9987513.post-43516033843211354892021-05-28T15:18:12.680+01:002021-05-28T15:18:12.680+01:00In fairness to Paul Graham, it's not really tr...In fairness to Paul Graham, it's not really true to say that he concludes what whatever everyone agrees is right must be wrong. What he says is that areas where everyone agrees are fruitful areas to <i>look for examples</i> of where they're wrong; and that doing so is of interest because it offers an opportunity to be right in a wrong culture.Mike Taylorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06039663158335543317noreply@blogger.com