MistressB said:
7Seven said:
If only you can see the light of day on how habitual this behaviour yours truly is; even if I displayed countless conclusions of surveys, test analysis of literal scientific proof - on how men wave frequencies work in an different pattern - you will dismiss them because it does not go with your senses of YOURSELF and of other women. Which displays a bias, mental comfort and laziness. Even when that VERY evidence is used against me - LOGICALLY, it difficult to refute. Still, you ONLY have 2 areas of discipline? Have you ever studied outside of England? How many languages do you speak besides English? Can you read and compose music? Are you affluent in ALL ENGLISH DICTION? And you only "almost" completed the first two! Come on sweetheart, you have a long way to go before you reach my area of comprehension. No "pun" intended, just stating the facts.
Yes, you're right, I will continue to dismiss gender stereotypes until someone can find me a definitive pattern of behaviour which is it possible to apply to all women as a genetic atrribute, globally, without exceptions, in comparison to all men, globally, without exceptions. Until you give me proof that these sweeping claims have genetic foundation I will continue to dismiss them as stereotyping, not because of intellectual myopia but because it is the appropriate word to describe massive overgeneralisation.
And in answer to your questions: yes I am capable of reading and composing music, yes I have skill in different languages, and yes I have partly completed an LLB in addition to my Cambridge degree. I am a decade younger than you: let's see what I can manage by your age, eh?
PS. Capitals don't make a bad argument better.
Miss B
I do not have much time and I do not believe in making women look absolutely foolish. But I suggest you continue your education because you are severely lacking a good - even by Cambridge standards. I believe you have been engaging too many "Womyn's Studies", and is far past brainwashed with half truths and dogma.
Half the word's population will dismiss this story as you will - but a new study claims the cleverest people are far more likely to be male than female. Men are more intelligent than women by about five IQ points on average, this does not even mention the ratio of the genius spectrum, which is ONE-SIDED making them better suited for tasks of high complexity, according to the authors of a paper due to be published in the British Journal of Psychology. May I deter your emotional babble - Take a read -The Dictionary of Psychology by Raymond J Corsini
A clip of one well renown psychologist of your quality in Cambridge states ---Genetic differences in intelligence between the sexes helped explain why many more men than women won Nobel Prizes or became chess grandmasters, the study by Paul Irwing and Richard Lynn concludes. They showed that men outnumbered women in increasing numbers as intelligence levels rose. There were twice as many with IQ scores of 125, typical for people with first-class degrees. When scores rose to 155, associated with genius, there were 5.5 men for every woman.----
Dr Irwing, a senior lecturer in organisational psychology at Manchester University, said he was uncomfortable with the findings. However, he said, the evidence was clear, despite the insistence of many academics that there were no meaningful gender differences in levels of intelligence. "For personal reasons I would like to believe men and women are equal, and broadly that's true," he said. "But over a period of time the evidence in favour of biological factors has become stronger and stronger. I have been dragged in a direction that I don't particularly like, but it would be sensible if the debate was based on what we pretty much know to be the case."
In my opinion, understanding all human intelligence is virtually unattainable. Why you ask? Human knowledge is flawed, because we have people like you who draw conclusions through their senses. It is almost deemed insulting to some, to suggest that there is a physical reality, and as a consequence, absolute truths that are necessarily derived from this reality. The notion that all these fragments is separately existent is evidently an illusion, and this illusion cannot do other than lead to endless conflict and confusion.
The real problem that this new knowledge faces is that it contradicts the current post-modern belief that it is impossible to know Reality, and thus to have Absolute Truth. All knowledge is relative to cultural constructions, which are ultimately merely ideas, not real things existing in themselves. Which is why you are at with the stance you take. It is faulty at best. Not even worth my thought and many others of higher comprehension.
As Aristotle states in his lecture on Metaphysics,
Rather, they start this, displaying it to the senses, .... and go on to offer more or less rigorous demonstrations of the per se attributes of their proprietary genera. This sort of procedure is inductive (empirical) and it is as plain as a pikestaff that it does not amount to a demonstration of essence or of what it is to be a thing.
