isnt feminism pointless now women are basicaly equal?

Scroll to see replies

Using science as an excuse for ignorance.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Look, this isn't even the main point (which is your misrepresentation or, if you rather, libel) but you've made a wild claim and failed to justify it beyond personal anecdote. If you have any actual evidence, then I'm happy to consider it. If, however, you wish to argue that your personal anecdotes are more reliable than legitimate evidence, then I suggest you take this proposal to the philosophy forum since I don't think this conversation will go much further. Wikipedia does have a useful entry though:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anecdotal_evidence

The term [anecdotal evidence] is often used in contrast to scientific evidence, such as evidence-based medicine, which are types of formal accounts. Some anecdotal evidence does not qualify as scientific evidence because its nature prevents it from being investigated using the scientific method. Misuse of anecdotal evidence is an informal fallacy and is sometimes referred to as the "person who" fallacy ("I know a person who..."; "I know of a case where..." etc. Compare with hasty generalization). Anecdotal evidence is not necessarily representative of a "typical" experience; in fact, human cognitive biases such as confirmation bias mean that exceptional or confirmatory anecdotes are much more likely to be remembered. Accurate determination of whether an anecdote is "typical" requires statistical evidence.[6][7]

Reply 301

Zanaa

Original post by Implication

I didn't say my anecdotes are more reliable than "legitimate" evidence?? I said that they're not invalid. The problem isn't me completely dismissing science and research (which I clearly didn't do), it's you completely dismissing others' experiences. I haven't made any claims that social science or science in general is unreliable, because I studied sociology for 3 years. Who is the one lying now?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 302

Implication

Original post by Zanaa

What have I lied about?

Sorry; I should have been clearer: I am telling you that your belief that all men you have met are predatory is not convincing evidence that most men believe that it is okay to sexually assault or rape a drunk woman, or that they should be able to. It simply does not follow, even if you can convince me that all men you have met are "predatory" - see hasty/faulty generalisation.

Reply 303

ClickItBack

Original post by Zanaa

And btw I don't need to give you evidence that most males think like this. I am a ex-muslim women who has lived with oppression all her life and still does. The only proof I have is my experience of men. I cannot say that not all men are predatory because every man I know is predatory. I cannot base My beliefs on somebody else's reality or the "not all men" phrase that people so frequently use. I base my opinions on my own experiences because thats common sense and everybody does.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Actually, that's not common sense; that's wilful narrow mindedness and rank stupidity, and not everybody does it at all.

Reply 304

Legilimency

There's no need to be rude when discussing. Please show each other respect despite your differences. Nastiness should not be a part of the argument.

Reply 305

Jammy Duel

Original post by Zanaa

I'm skeptical.
And an example of how stupid that "common sense" is would be for me to, hypothetically, say "I know one member of [insert group here], that one person was a total [insert negative attribute here], therefore based on my experience I can say all members of [group] are [attribute]"
e.g.
I know a feminist, they're a complete and utter idiot, therefore all feminists are idiots.