The Intellectual Capacity Of Women

[Jazzy Jinx]

Well, since we seem to have reached an agreement, I guess that concludes the debate unless someone else would like to add to it.

 

[Frozenserpent]

Gah... I hate debating outside the Debate Hall... Well what do you think about all of it then?

Because to sum up what I think, I think it is impossible to measure intelligence and therefor it is impossible to make claims that men are mentally superior.

Edit: Fine... I'll debate.

I could make a claim that since I am a guy and you're a girl, I am instantly smarter and end the argument right there. But you would say that you are simply smarter than me on individual standards. This must mean that you think majority rules.

If that is the case and a majority of men are smarter then that would be a fact based off of these claims. But say the next year, more women are smarter than men so the fact shifts in that women would be smarter than men.

Long story short, you can't have a shifting fact, but you can have a variable. To label this thing as fact is impossible since it can shift whenever.

You are misunderstanding. Let's assume for now that men tend to be smarter than women, and that intelligence is something quantifiable. Your claims are unfounded because while you are a man, it does not automatically makes you smarter than a specific women. Instead, what it means is that if you get a sample of random men, and a sample of random women, the sample of men tend to be smarter than the sample of women. These generalizations do not dictate individual circumstances.

And, to clarify my position, I believe women and men are equal, for all intents and purposes, biologically in regards to intelligence and numerous other associated qualities. However, while I believe that, I do not subscribe to the idea that women and men MUST be equal. Suppose I do believe that men are intellectually superior to women. Do you have any evidence that counters my side? Personal anecdotes do not count.

 

[tmw_redcell]

I was interested so I looked for the article "The Intellectual Capacity of David Stove" that's mentioned at the bottom of the page in the link in the first post.

This is the abstract: "David Stove's essay “The intellectual capacity of women” was first published in 1990, in the Proceedings of a Sydney philosophical society. It has been re-published twice since his death. It seems though that during his lifetime Stove himself refused to agree to its being re-printed. This raises two questions: Did Stove believe his essay on women contains mistakes? And: does it contain mistakes?

The main flaws in the essay stem from a rash adoption of simplistic ideas about probability coupled with a question-begging definition of capacity. The work also contains contradictions and exaggerations and some unwise forays into social history. Stove was an intelligent man so it seems likely that he would have recognised those flaws."

And here's a PDF: http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/sloth/Teichman-contra-Stove.pdf
Anyone who finds themselves actually agreeing with Stove here should read that article.

I also find it entertaining that, on the front page of SWF, this thread's title is shortened to "The Intellectual Capacity Of..." and then the most recent poster's name is right there.

 

[Seed of Sorrow]

I also find it entertaining that, on the front page of SWF, this thread's title is shortened to "The Intellectual Capacity Of..." and then the most recent poster's name is right there.

HAHA, that is great.

 

[joshisrad]

Haha, that's pretty good.

On the subject of why Stove wouldn't have wanted it published? Maybe it's possible the essay was originally intended as a joke? Or, just something to piss off another professor, you know? I was thinking about why I wouldn't want something of mine published, and if it wasn't something I considered serious and if I foresaw it seriously diminishing the perception of my intellect/character in the eyes of the world, I'd probably do the same.

Also, dictionary.com has a pretty good first definition of intelligence.

"capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc. "

I don't see how impossible it is to assess that. Just as we can rightfully say that Ken has superior mindgames(which consist fundamentally of the capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc, am I right?) to just about every other player. Discuss.

 

[Mediocre]

Also, dictionary.com has a pretty good first definition of intelligence.

"capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc. "

I don't see how impossible it is to assess that.

It's impossible to assess because it is not about current ability, but rather about potential ability. Like I said before, testing the average intelligence of people in Sudan and comparing the results to those of Americans wouldn't prove that Americans were smarted. It would merely prove that Americans are exposed to a different environment. There is a universal variance in environment between Sudanese people and American people.

Depending on a person's environment, intellectual ability may never be realized. When comparing women to men, there is also a universal variance in how they are treated.

If you could somehow eliminate that variance (and prove that it had been eliminated), then you might be able accurately compare the intelligence of men and women. However, until you can be sure that there is no difference in how men and women are treated by society, you can't be sure whether the tests you're administering are measuring the quality of their intellect or the nature of their upbringing.

Personally, I don't think it's possible to completely get rid of the differences in treatment between the sexes. And even if you were able to do it, I don't see how you could prove it.