[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/lit/ - Literature

View post   
File: 19 KB, 306x361, I'm a slut.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18907829 No.18907829 [Reply] [Original]

Has there ever been a female metaphysician? What is her most important work?

>> No.18907844
File: 2.72 MB, 240x234, tyrone.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18907844

>female metaphysician

>> No.18907856
File: 28 KB, 567x541, 3A4EDC5D-9EC3-490F-8290-86E6299FEE08.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18907856

>The metaphysics of the misogynistic principle: How white men raped everything with their eyes

>> No.18907873

>>18907829
Elizabeth Grosz

>m-muh wah-memes
Fuck off OP

>> No.18907880

>>18907829
>Has there ever been a female metaphysician?
I don't know, and I don't care.

>What is her most important work?
The ones she didn't publish.

>> No.18907881

>>18907829
Margaret Cavendish is the only one that comes to mind

>> No.18907883

>>18907829
http://www.kristeva.fr/snyder_en.html
https://www.jstor.org/stable/3810864

>>18907880
retard alert

>> No.18907901

>>18907873
>>18907883
>postmodern psychoanalytic feminist theory
it's not only horribly embarrassing; it's not even metaphysics, which is what op asked for.

>> No.18907904

>>18907883
Whatever you say honey.

>> No.18907949

>>18907901
This. There has never been a woman in history seriously engaged with metaphysics. There are a few mystics and lots of mediocre ethical philosophers, a few logicians nobody cares about, and a whole bunch of groupies of French postmodernists who do derivative work about vaginal subjectivities. No metaphysics.

Women simply do not care about metaphysics. They don't even know what it is.

>> No.18909239

>>18907829
https://www.amazon.com/How-Laws-Physics-Nancy-Cartwright/dp/0198247044

>> No.18909243
File: 333 KB, 1711x893, 1485064440437.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18909243

zoomer poetry

>> No.18909247

>>18907949
>women don't care about metaphysics
>they don't even know what it is
WTF since when did women become so unfathomably based?

>> No.18909391

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marguerite_Porete

>> No.18909401
File: 176 KB, 1024x1024, 1629723762818.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18909401

Women can't appreciate anything that isn't a vehicle to accrue for themselves more power (be that power in the form of recognition, beauty or capital)
Hence why when they do write it's almost always along the lines of "why everything's bad and unfair and I should get more stuff".
I think Ayn Rand is actually the only female philosopher to have ever lived.

>> No.18909409
File: 921 KB, 2496x2061, 1626576154108.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
18909409

>>18909391
Umm, BASED department? I stand corrected on my Ayn Rand comment.
Most here will not be able to handle the depth of Porete's work though. They will be annihalated in the depths of her thought

>> No.18909442

>>18907873
What the anon said, how embarrassing for you.

>> No.18909447

>>18907829
miragonz is about the metaphysics of weed

>> No.18909537

>>18909391
I like her book, shame the H*ly R*man Emp*re couldn't allow freedom of expression and burned her alive

>> No.18910119

>>18907829
Anne Conway BTFO Descartes

>> No.18910137

>>18909391
>mystic
not metaphics, my local gypsy fortuneteller would be considered a mystic philosopher according to western nuacademia

>> No.18911672

"Female" and "Philosophy" go together like oil and water

>> No.18911689

>>18907829
Julia kristeva

>> No.18911695

>>18907829
Me

>> No.18911696

>>18907829
https://wslamp70.s3.amazonaws.com/leostrauss/s3fs-public/pdf/transcript/Republic-1961.pdf

LS: Yes. Well, we are not speaking now of her private morals. And I think you [could] find more. 73 You don’t have to go so far.74 I have seen business women75 [who] were fantastically clever, much more than most men are. Good.76 And I think that one would probably find a long list of outstanding women in practice: politics, business, and so on. But what was the other capacity with which Plato is particularly concerned in this book? Kings we had; what about philosophers? Yes, we have the galaxy of great rulers and we have seen Elizabeth I and Catherine II, xxix and you would probably think of some more if you would—they are [. . .] But what about the philosophers?
Student: Nor is there a first-rate mathematician.
LS: Yes, we are not speaking—I see. Well. [Laughter] Let us leave it at the philosophers. So you would say zero, zero. You would say zero.
Student: Yes.
LS: Zero. Good.77 That was also my impression, and I said that is part of the irony of Plato, that he says these foolish he-men who always say they are so far superior to women, but in that activity of which they are so boastful, namely, rulers, governors, quite a few women could do the same thing. You remember the story. What was the name? [. . .] the famous Dutch leader in the sixteenth century who had such a shrewd grandmother? 78xxx He was very young, twenty-one, when he was compelled to go into politics. The family compelled that, and he was afraid of these things and she, the old wise woman, told him: You have no notion with how little intelligence the world is governed. And you see, she knew the secret.79 Good. In other words, that, I think, is the irony: that this [thing] of which the he-men are so boastful women can do, but that which the he-men themselves despise as unworthy of—you know, philosophy they cannot do. Well, I explained this once to a class in an upstate New York college twenty years ago, and the man in charge of the class—I was there a visitor—said: “But you have forgotten Susan Stebbing.” xxxi And then I simply said: “I’m very sorry; I’d forgotten.” But this is I think a very—what, I don’t know. Oh, you must know, you come from Britain. She was a very respectable professor of logic, I believe.
Student: Yes.
LS: Yes, but she would not belong to—yes, good.

>> No.18911721

>>18909243
I wanna coom on her face

>> No.18911743

>>18911689
See >>18907949, you dullard

>> No.18911831

>>18907829
http://libgen.gs/item/index.php?md5=3F45FBBEA0E278741E9E460C81A37F6B

>> No.18911856

>>18911696
>Nor is there a first-rate mathematician.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emmy_Noether

>> No.18912009

>>18911856
That was a student speaking. Focus on what Strauss had to say.

>> No.18912015

>>18907856
Kek

>> No.18913116

>>18909239
shh the brainlets on this board don't know about serious contemporary metaphysics