For example, one I think I grok goes: Virginia Woolf —> Hannah Arendt —> Ursula Le Guin, Donna Harroway (temporality approach)
Or Simone de Beauvoir —> Betty Friedan —> Judith Butler (“other” theory/identity-constructionist approach)
Does this make any sense?
Conversation
I read Friedan and part of Beauvoir out of “need to grok female viewpoint” motive in my early 20s. Not strong enough a motive to get far.
Renewed interest now is narrower and not about women so much as temporality where women thinkers seem to have had unusual amount to say.
1
7
Replying to
Iirc spatial reasoning is one of the very few documented cognition differences between men and women on average. Penn State had (female) engineering profs improve CAD course outcomes by addressing the gap directly engr.psu.edu/AWE/misc/ARPs/
1
1
1
I'm now thinking women would likely perform better on certain classes of temporal reasoning tasks.
1
Replying to
There’s a deep irony here, of you espousing a gendered view on intelligence in a thread that’s ostensibly rooted in your understanding of feminine thinkers
1
1
This excerpt from ’s Utopia of Rules is a bit over the top but nicely encapsulates my discomfort with what you’re doing here
1
Replying to
Yeah, that's a definite concern, but otoh I do want to pay attention to the sources of apparent differences I see in how I think about stuff and how some women writers seem to. I'm not pre-committed to either there being differences or no differences.
It's not apparent in all topics. For example, there is nothing notably gendered about the difference between Conan Doyle and Christie in mysteries. But there does seem to be when it comes to some philosophy topics. Maybe it's illusory, maybe not.
Replying to
Ok but “this particular brand of women thinkers” is not “women”
1

