Aristotle's Account of the Subjection of Women

Stauffer, Dana Jalbert

doi:10.1017/s0022381608080973

Cited by 24 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Like slaves, women were inferior beings, destined to be ruled by free men and ineligible for citizenship. The role of both slaves and women was to liberate free men from everyday household concerns, allowing them to participate in the important activities of the political community (Sandel, ; Stauffer, ).…”

Section: Definitions From Philosophymentioning

confidence: 99%

Fairness in Measurement and Selection: Statistical, Philosophical, and Public Perspectives

Zwick

2019

Educational Measurement

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Selection decisions have a major impact on our education, occupation, and quality of life, and the role of standardized tests in selection has always been a source of controversy. Here, I consider various definitions of fairness in measurement and selection-those emerging from within educational measurement and statistics, those from philosophy, and finally, those from the public. I use examples of public challenges to selection practices to illustrate the fact that technical and philosophical definitions of fairness do not align well with public concerns. I emphasize the importance of promoting awareness of existing standards, advocating for the fair use of testing and selection practices, and communicating in a candid and straightforward way when engaging with test takers and test users.

show abstract

Section: Definitions From Philosophymentioning

confidence: 99%

Fairness in Measurement and Selection: Statistical, Philosophical, and Public Perspectives

Zwick

2019

Educational Measurement

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…17 This is does not, on Annas's view, exculpate her. After all, Annas might argue, Mary also lives in a world where movies 16 For a dissenting view about Aristotle's views on women, see Levy (1990)-also Stauffer (2008), Saxonhouse (1985), Swanson (1999) and Dobbs (1996), as well as (from a sociobiological perspective) Arnhart (1994). For additional discussion of these issues, see the exchange between Hirshman (1992), Posner (1992) and Nussbaum (1992).…”

Section: )mentioning

confidence: 99%

I—Tamar Szabó Gendler: The Third Horse: On Unendorsed Association and Human Behaviour

Gendler

2014

Aristot Soc Suppl Vol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

On one standard reading, Plato's works contain at least two distinct views about the structure of the human soul. According to the first, there is a crucial unity to human psychology: there is a dominant faculty that is capable of controlling attention and behaviour in a way that not only produces right action, but also ‘silences’ inclinations to the contrary—at least in idealized circumstances. According to the second, the human soul contains multiple autonomous parts, and although one of them, reason, normatively dominates the others, it may fail to do so descriptively: even in the face of full, explicit, well‐reasoned, conscious awareness of the truth of a claim, a person may continue to feel residual inclinations towards disavowed, inappropriate and misguided experiences and courses of action. In this paper, I will argue that even the second of these views does not fully capture the ways in which reflective commitment fails to guide human action. Whereas the traditional multi‐part soul view is well suited to explaining phenomena that involve a cognitive conflict between our reflective attitudes and our non‐reflective endorsements (such as weakness of the will), it falls short when we turn to the full array of human patterns of response, because it neglects a further source of challenge to reason's rule, namely, the mediation of associative and heuristic processes. These processes introduce complications for which the simple faculty psychology view cannot adequately account. Because they produce challenges to reason's rule that are phenomenologically invisible, traditional strategies for self‐regulation cannot be straightforwardly applied to their management.

show abstract

“…99 -In a reading that one might call gnostic, Ambler (1987), Levy (1990), andStauffer (2008) give a different answer. They present an Aristotle who is secretly in favor of women's rights and emancipation but lacks the courage to say so directly for reasons never overtly expressed.…”

Section: Mental Misreadingsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Aristotle’s Unanswered Questions: Women and Slaves in Politics 1252a-1260b

Parker

2012

Eugesta

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aristotle is more straightforward than his interpreters. A number of scholars have championed an Aristotle guided by pure inductive observation to reach a theory of the inferiority of women and slaves. This view, however, is contrary both to Aristotle’s expressed method and his stated purpose. He begins from the phainomena and his explicit goal is to defend them and the advantages of master and husband. The current power structure is founded on nature and is and must be logically and genetically superior to the arguments he makes in its favor. In general, scholars have explicated either the argument about slaves or that about women. However, each is inescapably fettered to the other. The unquestioned inferiority of slaves is the analogical basis for the hierarchy of male over female (e.g. 1252a31). The unquestioned natural inferiority of women the basis of the proof of the existence of the natural slave (54b12-16). Aristotle reveals the uncertain heart of his argument in a series of unanswered rhetorical questions (59b23-37). There are three parts to his defense. The philosophical move is to reject Plato’s unity of virtue. Mere difference in quantity (Plato’s solution) provides contingent not absolute rule. The teleological move argues from different virtues to different essences for women and slaves. Aristotle creates separate entities to be ruled. The rhetorical move is to blend analogies based on the “natural” difference between male and female with the hierarchical difference between master and slave. Thus we reach the master trope of Western philosophy: man is spirit/culture, woman is matter/nature. A series of misreadings of Aristotle’s purposes and arguments reveal how successful he has been in anchoring ideology in a politicized nature. Philosophy is not a purely intellectual exercise; it is also a call to moral action. We must ask and answer Aristotle’s rhetorical questions.

show abstract

Aristotle's Account of the Subjection of Women

Cited by 24 publications

References 24 publications

Fairness in Measurement and Selection: Statistical, Philosophical, and Public Perspectives

Fairness in Measurement and Selection: Statistical, Philosophical, and Public Perspectives

I—Tamar Szabó Gendler: The Third Horse: On Unendorsed Association and Human Behaviour

Aristotle’s Unanswered Questions: Women and Slaves in Politics 1252a-1260b

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About