Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Provocations of Camille Paglia

city-journal.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 171 posts

Re: The Provocations of Camille Paglia

#161

Post by euroPoor »

simonh wrote: post #151
euroPoor wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She’s got the same level of understanding of Foucault and Derrida as Jordan Peterson, ie. ill-informed and superficial. What a shame to call these people clear-sighted when they clearly not only misread Continental philosophers but it becomes apparent that they didn’t even read some of the works they’re criticizing.

Peterson is unbelievably well read, he was on a project for the United Nations and read 300 books on climate science. I'd be very hesitant before accusing him of criticising a book or author without having done his research. I've seen him catch out interviewers a few times where they hadn't read the material in question, but he had and knew it very well.

Doubtful that a clinical psychologist would grasp 300 books in a highly mathematical field. You know, next to doing his job.

I’m not saying he isn’t smart just that his conceptions about Continental philosophers stem from poor understanding and shallow reading of the philosophers’ works.

Re: The Provocations of Camille Paglia

#162

Post by dang »

faissaloo wrote: post #160
dang wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This breaks the site guideline against flamebait. Would you please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and not do this here?

It seems to me that the post I was replying to was the one flamebaiting.

Even so, it doesn't mean you can post like that to HN. You don't not get a speeding ticket because some other car passed you.

I wouldn't say the GP was flamebait, though. Controversial no doubt, but not gratuitously provocative like your reply was. That's a big difference.

Re: The Provocations of Camille Paglia

#163

Post by YorkshireSeason »

soudiere wrote: post #158
YorkshireSeason wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The paper "The Five Sexes, Revisited" which you can find at [1], is at best an essay on gender and recent changes in gender-based legislation, at worst badly written political activism, but most certainly not in the slightest a scientific investigation into the biology of reproduction. The latter is what those who criticise modern conceptions of gender have in mind. [1] https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/21a4/4d10b4035…

I referenced the original 1993 essay "The Five Sexes" You have referenced the 2000 essay, "The Five Sexes, Revisited" No on claimed it was a scientific investigation, I quoted the full text of the issue I was discussing in a previous comment.

I replied to "jboynyc" uncritical remarks about "The Five Sexes, Revisited", as if "The Five Sexes, Revisited" mitigated the weaknesses of Fausto-Sterling's work.

Re: The Provocations of Camille Paglia

#164

Post by YorkshireSeason »

soudiere wrote: post #159
YorkshireSeason wrote: post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

we should probably read it I spent about 20 minutes reading parts of it. I'd classify it as "history of science" (a perfectly valid subject). Bottom line is she's highly No. She is in no way "highly credentialised in biology". She has taught at universities but "Women's Studies and the History of Science", and "History of Consciousness [...] and Feminist Studies". (From [1]) The content of her Yale PhD is not in biol…

Link me Haraway's PhD thesis please, I can't find it on scihub. Original assertion was "highly credentialed biologists", which is different than "highly credentialed in biology", and I would agree with your objection to the later statement, her credentials lie mostly outside biology. She's highly credentialed by the nature of her PhD from Yale, teaching at Hopkins & UCSC. She's a biologist by training, achieving her…

Thanks for the link to Marx PhD. As far as I understand [1] is (a book version of) Haraway's doctoral dissertation.

   "highly credentialed biologists", 
   which is different than 
   "highly credentialed in biology"
By that sophistic logic, I'm a "highly credentialed chess player" simply because as a child I played a few games of chess and now have lots of credentials in a STEM field. By the same logic I would also be a

- highly credentialed soccer player

- highly credentialed surfer

- highly credentialed linguist

and many more variants. All of the above would be misleading because clearly statements like "X is a highly credentialed Y" are usually assumed to mean that X's credentials are in subject Y. Since a persistent and widely known criticism of Gender Studies and the concept of gender is the severed link with biology in general, and the biology of fertility in particular, is remarkable, and it is difficult to believe it is done in good faith.

[1] https://monoskop.org/images/5/58/Haraway_Donna_Crystals_Fabr...

Re: The Provocations of Camille Paglia

#165

Post by faissaloo »

dang wrote: post #162
faissaloo wrote: post #160

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems to me that the post I was replying to was the one flamebaiting.

Even so, it doesn't mean you can post like that to HN. You don't not get a speeding ticket because some other car passed you. I wouldn't say the GP was flamebait, though. Controversial no doubt, but not gratuitously provocative like your reply was. That's a big difference.

I don't see how my post was any more gratuitous than the one I was replying to. Also a speeding ticket is not comparable because this is an issue which has greater societal implications.

Re: The Provocations of Camille Paglia

#166

Post by soudiere »

YorkshireSeason wrote: post #164
soudiere wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Link me Haraway's PhD thesis please, I can't find it on scihub. Original assertion was "highly credentialed biologists", which is different than "highly credentialed in biology", and I would agree with your objection to the later statement, her credentials lie mostly outside biology. She's highly credentialed by the nature of her PhD from Yale, teaching at Hopkins & UCSC. She's a biologist by training, achieving her…

Thanks for the link to Marx PhD. As far as I understand [1] is (a book version of) Haraway's doctoral dissertation. "highly credentialed biologists", which is different than "highly credentialed in biology" By that sophistic logic, I'm a "highly credentialed chess player" simply because as a child I played a few games of chess and now have lots of credentials in a STEM field. By the same logic I would also be a - hig…

It's not sophisticated logic, it's plain reading of the grammatical structure of the phrase. An adverb and adjective modifying a noun.

Haraway did not play a few games of chess as a child, she studied 7+ years to get a PhD.

I'm with you that gender studies has an evidence/science problem in general, baselessly attacking a researchers credentials does not prove that point.

Re: The Provocations of Camille Paglia

#167

Post by soudiere »

YorkshireSeason wrote: post #163
soudiere wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I referenced the original 1993 essay "The Five Sexes" You have referenced the 2000 essay, "The Five Sexes, Revisited" No on claimed it was a scientific investigation, I quoted the full text of the issue I was discussing in a previous comment.

I replied to "jboynyc" uncritical remarks about "The Five Sexes, Revisited", as if "The Five Sexes, Revisited" mitigated the weaknesses of Fausto-Sterling's work.

Ah apologies, yes her revisiting of the original paper does not address many of the issues raised.

Re: The Provocations of Camille Paglia

#168

Post by dang »

faissaloo wrote: post #165
dang wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even so, it doesn't mean you can post like that to HN. You don't not get a speeding ticket because some other car passed you. I wouldn't say the GP was flamebait, though. Controversial no doubt, but not gratuitously provocative like your reply was. That's a big difference.

I don't see how my post was any more gratuitous than the one I was replying to. Also a speeding ticket is not comparable because this is an issue which has greater societal implications.

If you don't find that analogy helpful, here's a proverb instead: two wrongs don't make a right.

Re: The Provocations of Camille Paglia

#169

Post by faissaloo »

dang wrote: post #168
faissaloo wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how my post was any more gratuitous than the one I was replying to. Also a speeding ticket is not comparable because this is an issue which has greater societal implications.

If you don't find that analogy helpful, here's a proverb instead: two wrongs don't make a right.

The proverb is generally used as if context is irrelevant to the morality of a given action and I reject that notion.

Re: The Provocations of Camille Paglia

#170

Post by simonh »

euroPoor wrote: post #161
simonh wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Peterson is unbelievably well read, he was on a project for the United Nations and read 300 books on climate science. I'd be very hesitant before accusing him of criticising a book or author without having done his research. I've seen him catch out interviewers a few times where they hadn't read the material in question, but he had and knew it very well.

Doubtful that a clinical psychologist would grasp 300 books in a highly mathematical field. You know, next to doing his job. I’m not saying he isn’t smart just that his conceptions about Continental philosophers stem from poor understanding and shallow reading of the philosophers’ works.

At the time that was his job.
Post reply on HN