(January 19, 2016 at 4:03 am)Irrational Wrote:(January 19, 2016 at 3:49 am)pool the great Wrote: 1. It can be scientifically proven that men have a higher testosterone in their body which are the reasons for their aggressive and competitive nature.
2. It can be proved by basic observation that it is not society that dictated how men and women should function through stereotypes. Look at some animals, like say - dogs, no one taught them how boy dogs should behave or how girl dogs should behave - they have no society to impose "stereotypes" on them, yet they project distinctive characteristics that categorize them as a male and female.
Do you understand now that people are the way they are not because of stereotypes? Stereotypes were created because people were the way they were in the first place. You're getting the concept backwards.
1. Yeah, that's just one example. Is that the only one you can come up with to back up your points empirically?
2. I don't trust anecdotes as much as I do empirical studies. And plus, what may be true of dogs and cats are not always true of human beings. That itself has been empirically supported, time and time again. We are far more complex beings than dogs and cats.
Forgive me for asking, but why exactly is the scientific proof that a relatively higher testosterone in an average male body is the causation for aggressive, competitive and other related characteristics not enough to convince you that it is not because of social conditioning that males are aggressive, competitive etc but because of their inherent nature? Is that a logical fallacy I see?
