[ 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: 17 KB, 590x331, 1412710303521.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5581061 No.5581061 [Reply] [Original]

Can you give an example of something that IS a social construct?

Bonus points for supporting your declaration.

For you.

GAME

>> No.5581066

>>5581061

Language.

>> No.5581072

the handshake

>> No.5581075

gender
racism
privilege
shitlords

>> No.5581076

>>5581061
>a social construct?

religion, judaism, islam, etc...

>> No.5581080

>>5581066
Stalin says no.

I'm serious, read his _On Linguistics_

>> No.5581085

>>5581080

I'll read it for a laugh, but seriously that's adorable.

>> No.5581087

swear words

>> No.5581092

>>5581080
>>5581085

>It cannot be otherwise. Language exists, language has been created precisely in order to serve society as a whole, as a means of intercourse between people, in order to be common to the members of society and constitute the single language of society, serving members of society equally, irrespective of their class status.

Uwotm8? He's literally claiming that language is a social construct.

>> No.5581104

>>5581092
Language and society grew together: language helps make society possible, society makes language a necessity. Trying to divide them is futile.

>> No.5581107

>>5581092
Stalin is saying language is a transhistorical national category. ie: not a social category, ie: not formed by class struggle.

>> No.5581108

>>5581104

That's nice, but it's got nothing to do with what I said. I'm reading the article and Stalin absolutely agrees that language is socially constructed.

>> No.5581109

>>5581107

see >>5581108

>> No.5581136

>>5581108
>>5581109
>I don't understand what nation is.
Well I'm sorry you're illiterate and uneducated, but people pay good money for that and I don't scab.

>> No.5581142

>>5581136

State your argument or quit being an evasive fag.

>> No.5581157

Gender.

>> No.5581160

>>5581142
Look up a dic-def of transhistorical.

>> No.5581163

>>5581061

You

>> No.5581164

>>5581066
Language is the construct of biology, ie. how our brains are constructed as well as our lungs and mouths.

>> No.5581167

>>5581160

You still need to say how anything you've said relates to what I said. It doesn't, and you're just a sad contrarian faggot.

>>5581164

If that was the case everyone would be born knowing a language.

>mfw people who've never studied linguistics feel the need to chime in with their shitty ill-considered opinions

>> No.5581169
File: 32 KB, 315x255, ancestralrecall.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5581169

>>5581061
Social Constructivism is a social construct.

It's underpinnings are based around analyzing and criticizing society. In order for it to exist there must be a society to create it so that said society can criticize itself. There for it is constructed by the very thing it is used to criticize and thus socially constructed.

>> No.5581182

>>5581167
>If that was the case everyone would be born knowing a language.

Guess, walking is a social construct
Guess beards are a social construct
Guess penis over 1 centimeter is a social construct
Guess fertility is a social construct

Do you have no concept of the brain and body developing after birth, are you a baby sized infant posting on the internet?

>> No.5581189

>>5581182

If you can't figure out why these are bad arguments, you are utterly fucking retarded.

>> No.5581190

>>5581189
Not that anon, but it's your own argument.

>> No.5581202

>>5581190

No, it isn't. You can't have an IQ over room temperature while believing that biology causes a person raised in Japan to learn Japanese.

>> No.5581209

The QWERTY keyboard layout.

>> No.5581212

Trousers. They were conceived when a man was cleaning his roof and his legs slipped in to two separate drainpipes.

>> No.5581218

>>5581061
rape.

>> No.5581230

Literally everything is a social construct because I'm a sceptical idealist who beleives in the underdetermination of facts by words. The problem with feminism is that it thinks gender is a special social construct created by a white cabal called The Patriarchy, and we should disregard it. They are complete spastics.

>> No.5581270

>>5581202
That's A language, not language you fucking moron.

>> No.5581277
File: 186 KB, 500x395, 500_LEGO80years_Children.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5581277

"is a social construct" is a social construct.

Also lego.

>> No.5581284

>>5581270
okay chomsky

>> No.5581291

>>5581061
Yes, Rousseaus' magnum opus.

>> No.5581310

>>5581061
If anything can be a social construct, the concept suffers the same problem as some definitions of art. They become meaningless. An empty buzzword.

Kinda like:
"When everyone's super... none will be." Jaden Smith.

The only reason to call something a "social construct" is the possibilty that this thing can be "social engineered". Changed in some kind of radical way. Calling something "social construct", generally, just reveals that there is a desire to desqualify it and change it. Tbh, some customs and practices are rooted so deep in society that trying changing them will just cause problems.

>> No.5581330

>>5581202
Then why does a person raised speaking Japanese learn it differently than someone who picks it up later?

>> No.5581333

>>5581061

ISIS

>> No.5581374
File: 75 KB, 500x336, FOUKYOULT.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5581374

riveting thread, mon frères, can't express how excited i am for it to continue

>> No.5582363
File: 182 KB, 550x774, old_school_cool_12.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5582363

>>5581374
YOU KILLED IT, FOOKY!

>> No.5582378

>>5581061
>knowing what the phrase "social construct" refers to
>not just screaming 24/7 that race, gender, sexual preference etc either ARE or ARE NOT "social constructs"

>> No.5582379

Morality

>> No.5582403
File: 13 KB, 200x217, leather.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5582403

>>5582363
>implying this stupid conversation was going anywhere in the first place
sweetheart, it was dead before i got here. which is a neat trick, considering.

>> No.5582406

Morality.

Aesthetics.

All values are social constructs. It doesn't mean that we should do away with them, however.

Also, institutions (like money, for instance) etc.

>> No.5582467

>>5581075
>gender
kekekeke u mad tranny

>> No.5582473

muh dick

>> No.5582492

>>5582406
>Aesthetics

Are you fucking kidding?

>> No.5582503

>>5581169

Google "immanent critique."

>> No.5582505

>>5581157
dont cut yourself

>> No.5582510

>>5582406
>All values are social constructs.
but that's wrong

>> No.5582529

>>5582406
You are confusing subjectivity with something being socially constructed.

I don't even think morality and aesthetics are subjective but still

>> No.5582532

>>5582529
>I don't even think morality and aesthetics are subjective but still
top
lel

>> No.5582546

>life

>> No.5582550

>>5581209

That's not a social construct. That's just something that society preserved for the sake of laziness, like religion or the holocaust numbers

>> No.5582551

>>5582546
>meaning

>> No.5582570

>>5582492
Honey, go to bed.

>>5582510
You can also go to bed.

>>5582529
Please stop coming here.

>> No.5582579

>>5581061
Is "The Game" the most euphoric thing in the history of the internet?

I vote yes

>> No.5582580

>>5582550
>>>/pol/

>> No.5582585

>>5582579
what's 'the game'?

>> No.5582588

2 things that made me laugh
>aesthetics is social construct
>language is social construct
people trying to justify these two statements by doing all the rhetorical gymnastics they have in their repertoire

>> No.5582595

>>5582585
Some early internet thing, it goes like this:
Everyone is playing the game. In the game there's no winning, only loosing. You loose when you remember you are playing the game.
So people tell each other "the game" and laugh at the very concept of an inside joke. Like many viral things before "viral" was a term, it lasted years and went through out the world.

>> No.5582608

>>5582595
that's the saddest thing i've ever heard

>> No.5582622
File: 2.17 MB, 320x240, The_Elimination_of_Justice.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5582622

>>5581061
Justice.
>Deal with it faggots

Has anyone consider language being partially a social construct or is "social constructions" a binary thing.

>> No.5582632

>>5582608
When you are 15 and learn it's a thing done in many countries it gives a feeling of belonging, I guess. Again, it's at least from the 90's and it live up to a few years ago.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Game_%28mind_game%29

>> No.5582655

>>5582632
there used to be lots of shitty texts on 4chan that ended with 'you just lost the game' or 'read the first letter of every line' and they would spell 'you just lost the game'. It was sad and unfunny, but not nearly as sad and unfunny as today's 'trolling'.

>> No.5582664

>>5581169
Are you the type of people who post "but spook is a spook" in Stirner threads?

>> No.5582690

>>5582664
Should I be reading your post as an implicit indictment of a singular existent or of a corporate personhood, or did you flub your punchline?

>> No.5582714

>>5582622

Right in the feels, i'm platonist scumbag so I'm still trying to disaprove it.

>> No.5583097

I'm a moral realist, but human conceptions of morality are largely socially constructed.

Money.

The subject.

>> No.5583106

>>5582622
Whether your title is appropriate depends on whether by "this notion of justice," he means "the notion of justice, about which we were already talking," or "this specific notion of justice, as opposed to other notions of justice."

>> No.5583110

Marriage, religion, femenism, government, millitaries, corporations, boy scouts, sports teams.

>> No.5583123

Masculinity

>> No.5583128

>>5582570
idiot

>> No.5583150

>>5581270

Chomsky is a moron because the ideal speaker listener scenario is a bullshit reduction. It's like analysing national anthems for the essential biologically based structure of songs.

>> No.5583157
File: 307 KB, 700x970, 1396349471380.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5583157

Left-wing ideologies (socialism, marxism, ...)

>> No.5583165

>>5583157
Right Wing Ideologies
(Traditionalism, Reactionary-ism ...)

>> No.5583168

>>5581167
You asked, and I answered here:
>Stalin is saying language is a transhistorical national category. ie: not a social category, ie: not formed by class struggle.

If you are too illiterate to know what "transhistorical" means, it isn't my problem, it is yours.

Asked and answered, now go read Stalin.

>> No.5583176

>>5583165
But those existed before the term "ideology" was coined.

They have a much better claim at being "natural" than 19th century philosophical musings.

>> No.5583186

>>5583176
The claim that capitalism is in anyway 'natural' is completely absurd. We started in a state of socialism and moved away from it.

>> No.5583189

>>5583176
They still come into being by the interaction of society.

Just because society did something a long-ass time ago, doesn't mean it didn't do that thing.

Breaking news: Pyramids just fucking popped up there!

>> No.5583197

>>5583186
If you're talking about hunter-gatherer sharing, calling it "socialism" is almost as wrong as calling it capitalism. It was unlike either, and political groups of every stripe (except MAYBE some radical primitivists) need to stop trying to claim hunter-gatherer culture as support for their ideas.

>> No.5583198

>>5582588
Explain how can aesthethics be super-social then.

I'm not even going into language, since I know shit about linguistics, but I can call some friends who do here if you want to make a fool of yourself twice.

>> No.5583209

>>5583198
I think if morality can be super-social, then aesthetics could also be, at least in part.

Saying language is not socially constructed is batshit fucking insane, though. We can document how language is shaped and created by society.

>> No.5583346

>>5583209
I don't think morality can be super-social either, while I do think we could study moral similarities between different societies based on evolutionary terms, though I doubt it would get anywhere.

>> No.5583374

>>5581169
Land destruction is a social construct.

And so are the power 9

>> No.5583387

Specific languages are shaped by society but language itself was not created by society

>> No.5583417

>>5582551
>words
there is no social construct beyond this, everybody go home

>> No.5583418
File: 450 B, 132x98, epic.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5583418

>>5581061
This

>> No.5583420

>>5581066

That's wrong, Chomsky proved that language is innate.

>> No.5583428

>>5583418
took me a second to work out what the big I was all about

>> No.5583429

>>5583420
You know what else is innate?
gender roles

>> No.5583434

>>5583418
that's a big i

>> No.5583437

>>5583428
it's a big i

>> No.5583441

>>5583428
Crashing this thread.

>> No.5583442

>>5583429
No they aren't. They vary by culture.

>> No.5583490

>>5583442
No, they really dont. There are social anomalies but in most societies the men rule, and the women are subject.

>> No.5583496 [DELETED] 

>>5583186
>The claim that capitalism is in anyway 'natural' is completely absurd. We started in a state of socialism and moved away from it.
¨
HAAAHAAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAHAHHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

LOOK AT THIS SOCIOLOGY MAJOR AND LAUGH!!!!!!1111!!1!

>> No.5583504

>>5583490
>http://mentalfloss.com/article/31274/6-modern-societies-where-women-literally-rule

>> No.5583506

>>5583442
Remember that one successful society/civilization that was ruled primarily by women?

>> No.5583518

>>5583506
>hurr durr all the large empires in history were ruled by men, those are the only valid societies, small tribes don't count for some reason

>> No.5583553

>>5583518
Please don't project

>> No.5583556

>>5583496
kek

>> No.5583563

>>5583553
Just admit I pwned you so we can both move on with our lives, kay?

>> No.5583573

>>5583563
Protip: there are none

>> No.5583580

>>5583573
None what?

>> No.5583593

>>5581061
Age
I don't care that I was born 20 years agon, I have the right to be 34 years old

>> No.5583599

>>5583573
>>5583506
>successful society
define that.
minoan society according to some was matriarchical.
stop been a faggot.
now i have to leave

>> No.5583602
File: 1.00 MB, 184x141, terrific.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5583602

>>5583580

>> No.5583603

>>5582532
>>5582570
> *tips fedora

just because you've never had to defend your ethical or aesthetic actions doesn't mean morality and aesthetics aren't objective

>> No.5583613 [DELETED] 

>>5583602
Ironic shitposting is still shitposting.

>> No.5583614

>>5583599
"There might have been one, now stop being mean; I'm gonna go now"

>> No.5583626

>>5583614
There are loads of matriarchal societies, I don't know why you're so butthurt. >>>/r9k/

>> No.5583633

>>5583626
Oh yes, I'm sure there are loads

we just don't definitely know any that existed

>> No.5583634

>>5581270
>>5581202
>>5581182
Go to read some Elias binary fucks

>> No.5583638

>>5583633
see
>>5583504

>> No.5583644

>>5583504
>>http://mentalfloss.com/article/31274/6-modern-societies-where-women-literally-rule

>societies where women rule
>societies I've never heard of

wow, what a coincidence

>> No.5583647

>>5583644
>I've never heard of it so it doesn't matter

>> No.5583660

>>5581182
not him, but I think he made the wrong distinction. the distinction between what is a social construct and what isn't is if a person would still develop it in complete isolation from society, or people in general. if they wouldn't, it's a social construct. for example, language is a social construct because a person wouldn't develop it in isolation. gender (not biological sex here, but concepts of what behaviors constitute "masculine" and "feminine" behavior) is a social construct because one wouldn't develop it in isolation. however, fertility is not a social construct because one would develop it regardless of whether they were around other people or not. so, of the things you named, walking actually may be a social construct (I'm not quite sure whether a child would develop the ability to walk without an example) but the other three things certainly are not.

>> No.5583679

>>5583603
Not him
Morality is inevitable among societies but the specific way it develops is a social construct.

>> No.5583689

>>5583638
>>5583644
>>5583647
>>5583504

MINANGKABAU - not a matriarchy, it's matrilineal

AKAN - not a matriarchy, it's matrilineal

BRIBRI - not a matriarchy, it's matrilineal

GARO - not a matriarchy, it's matrilineal

I feel it would be a waste of time to go on.

>> No.5583690

>>5583660
This

But maybe kids would learn to walk in isolation idk

>> No.5583701
File: 2.92 MB, 130x200, amputee.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5583701

>>5583647

> ~6-10 million people living in these societies in a world of 7.125 billion people
>implying this makes convincing evidence that gender roles don't exist for some innate, evolutionary reason
>implying small tribes are successful societies
>trying this hard to believe women and men can or want to do the same things

go back to the tumblr hugbox

>> No.5583704

>>5581061
i just lost le game xD

>> No.5583736

The problem with social constructs, is that makes you argument why something is not real because it's society created it, rather than seeing that the concept exists, and that one should start looking for the more pure form of the concept.

>> No.5583743

>>5583701
>implying small tribes are not successful societies
>implying that gender roles exist for some innate, evolutionary REASON
I would support you, if you weren't so stupid

>> No.5583769

>>5583736
No man, you got it wrong. If something is a social construct it doesn't mean is bad (most of the times institutions in general can't be replaced by something better, let alone removed), it just means that the way it have historicaly developed is not an absolute, so the naturalist arguments are not valid when defending these constructs.

>> No.5583793

>inb4 200 post thread and nobody establishes a definition of what a social construct is

>> No.5583834

>>5583769

But for example, ideas like Freedom or Justice are granted to social construct, but they also show ideas that could be preconceived in the first societies before that the society itself stablished them, like the need for fairness between individuals before having a structure of society. Could be conceived that the human had those ideas but not developed as concepts, could be that also those ideas start being developed in the individual while also his rationality is being developed.

>> No.5583835

>>5583793
A transformer as depicted by Bey

>> No.5583965

>>5583834
>could be that also those ideas start being developed in the individual while also his rationality is being developed.
Yes, remember that as a species, humans were always social animals, but they most likely developed lasting complex institutions later in their developement.
So it is reasonable to think that first human societies had some agreements aimed to ensure trust and avoid conflict. Fairness and justice are later developments.

>> No.5584010
File: 404 KB, 1200x1612, 1_2006-the-boycott-was-short-lived-within-a-year-moss-was-back-as-the-face-of-versace-and-a-host-of-other-brands.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5584010

>>5581061
Fashion.

>> No.5584023

>>5581061
society

>> No.5584058

>>5584023
Haha

>> No.5584293

>>5583157
Why did he get 0/10?

>> No.5584410

>>5583106
I'd speak in English, Noam, but I'm enjoying watching you sweat.

>> No.5584869
File: 30 KB, 397x383, oakflustered.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5584869

>>5583157
>no reddit?? :)

this triggered me

>> No.5585847

>>5581066

Except that's wrong you fucking retard. Chomsky proved that language is purely biological. It is not socially constructed in the least.

>> No.5585856

>>5585847
>Chomsky proved that language is purely biological.
orly

>> No.5585864

>>5585856

Yes. Anybody who claims language is socially constructed is an incompetent moron.

>> No.5585887

>>5585864
if you ever was interested in that question (i am not personally, but i read a book about different language theories once and remember a bit...), so if you ever was interested in that question and if you could think like a person from sci i.e. scientifically you would know that chomsky didn't 'prove' anything, his hypothesis (note, hypothesis) isn't generally accepted despite it's quite popular (also he already contradicts what he wrote earlier)

>> No.5585898

>>5585887

What is Chomsky's hypothesis?

>> No.5585911

time

evidence
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtkGtXtDlQA

>> No.5585918

>>5585898
infants are born with the specific mental infrastructure to learn language and all existing human languages conform to the rules of that preexisting biological structure

>> No.5585919

>>5585898
the language is congenital and there is some 'universal grammar' in our brain which appeared as a result of evolution
other people think the language appeared from gestures etc

>> No.5585927

>>5585918

So which rules does Chomsky say all human languages conform to?

>arguing UG with plebs who haven't even got degrees in linguistics

I'm about to get bored of this real quick.

>> No.5585933

>>5585927
i think it's closer to biology than to linguistics though...

>> No.5585941

>>5585847
>>5585864
He just *hypothesized* that a grammar module exists somewhere, somehow in the brain.
It's not even a biological hypothesis, and he's not even close to have an elaborated theory of how such a module is implemented.
what a proof.

>> No.5585942

>>5585927
oh I thought you were just asking for the definition. I don't know enough about it to argue it either way

>> No.5585946

>>5582655
what could possibly make you have such strong emotions about a completely benign joke?

Want to talk about it?

>> No.5585953

the most fun theory in that book it was deacon's one that the language is a some kind of parasite which uses human brain for procreation :3

>> No.5585995

>>5581061
Pop culture

>> No.5586003
File: 6 KB, 125x161, 23yqf.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
5586003

Most mental illnesses

>> No.5586008

>>5586003
Oh ya. I totally agree. Especially personality disorders.

>> No.5586033

>>5585933

Really? Universal Grammar is not to do with linguistics, but biology?

Wow.

>> No.5586058

>>5586033
what's so surprising that some supposed innate structure in your brain is related to biology?
and then, generally the question how humans achieved conscience and language is a biological one even without that universal grammar in your brain hypothesis

>> No.5586065

So,
Is culture related to biology?

>> No.5586102

>>5581061

Ebola

>> No.5586150

>>5583660
animals in captivity can demonstrate different behaviors dependent on their gender.

I don't see why it's so hard for people to understand that le evils of society aren't responsible for women generally displaying a tendency for being nurturing & caring.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOJaVL7N4G4

>> No.5586163

love.
friendship is an emotion and so is lust,
but love is pure social engineering.

>> No.5586169

>>5586163
don't you think it's important as a concept, though?

I mean, if we took it away, I feel like there'd be a hole left in its place.

>> No.5586199

>>5583701
this is sad, she has a pretty face and nice boobs. Fucking thalidomide

>> No.5586231

>>5581167
>people who've never studied linguistics feel the need to chime in with their shitty ill-considered opinions
Ditto. Armchair linguists are even worse than people who talk out of their asses about psychology and evolutionary biology.

>> No.5586240

>>5581164
>>5581167
>>5583420
>>5585847
>>5585856
>>5585941
>>5585864
>>5585887
>>all those other posts

Whether or not UG is real, it can still be said that the English language, or any other particular language is a social construct. There's nothing about an apple that compels you to produce the phonetic pattern [æpl], it's just something your ancestors arbitrarily assigned.

>> No.5586282

>>5585927
I mean, Chomsky himself said that Chomkian linguistics can be considered a subfield of cognitive psychology, which can be considered a subfield of biology.

That reductionist shit, son.

But I have a degree in linguistics too. I went to a generativist school so I know almost nothing about non-UG theories of grammar. Did you go to a functionalist school? Explain me some shit.

>> No.5586303

>>5586150
I think he was referring to "girls must like pink" concepts