Post-Modernism and the Evolution of Morality, continued
A more extensive discussion of General Semantics and Aristotelian logic was posted on this blog from 12-16 December 2013, and I will refer you to those postings for a fuller discussion of those topics. Suffice it to say that it led to the conclusion that “any classification system provides us only with units of description, perhaps useful to us in organizing our experience but not natural entities and not necessarily the best way in which to conceptualize events, and that all of the ideas that we have of the world and of ourselves are really social conventions which have no universal validity and which should not be confused with reality.”
With that as a given, the next step in the process was to consider how that affects morality, and for that I want to begin by reminding you of the (again previously) posted information about Laurance Kohlberg’s research on the development of moral reasoning and Carol Gilligan’s contribution (8-12 May 2014), which greatly expanded our understanding of moral development.
On 1 January 2014, I shared with you excerpts from a 1983 article by Landberg (Who said women are all bad? Almost everybody), in which she reported the opinions of women expressed by a number of “Titans of Western Thought.” Socrates is quoted as saying that “Woman is the source of all evil. Her love is to be dreaded more than the hatred of a man.” Plato believed that “Those of the men … who led a life of cowardice and injustice were suitably reborn as women.” Aristotle felt that “We should regard the female as afflicted with natural defectiveness.” Pythagoras believed that “There is a good principle which created order, light and man, and an evil principle which created chaos, darkness and women.” And Martin Luther observed that “God created Adam Lord of All Living Creatures, but Eve spoiled it all.” Postmodernism suggests that things aren’t nearly that simple.