welcome to the site! Read the description to the left for details regarding the theory behind this site. Some may know this section as an "Abstract"
The History of Energy
the beginning is the end
Under this section is a paper written for an Honours Psychology course, the History of Psychology. The task was to trace a topic from contemperary Psychology back through various historical stages to see how that topic has grown over the course of time. The topic I chose was energy, or Energy Psychology. Enjoy research from Feinstein (most recent) all the way back to Pythagoras.
The Future of Energy
the end is the beginning. This section includes all the previous homepage fails ;) enjoy!
This is the major veiwpoint taken on this site in regard to these topics, but since the completion of my Masters degree in Gender Studies, I've been trying to go back and make it more inclusive. This link includes a proposed field theory for Psychology because the two major branches of Psychology (quantitative and qualitative) find it hard to see eye to eye. This (and the next) section is for members only.
This section proposes a Grand Unified Field theory or "theory of everything" for Physics, backed up by a mathematical equation.
This section unites all sections together to unite the branches of Science and Religion. Many different perspectives are taken and these two seemingly opposing forces are united through many different angles.
This section looks at the conflicts or cycles between New Age free thought and Orthodox dogmaticism. The feud between these two opposing forces revealed the truth regarding the story of Jesus, what he really taught and to whom he truly gave the rites to teach his faith. This section explores why the movie The Last Temptation of Christ was banned in other countries, looks at the Da Vinci Code and presents a controversial paper/theory showing the hidden meaning of world religious symbols.
This section begins with a confusing paper about taking back the spirit. If the point can be penetrated, it tells an interesting story about Modernity and the Age of Reason, with a twist by providing evidence that emotion could be considered superior to reason. It also complicates Carteasian mind/body distinctions by adding spirit back into the equation. Have fun following that one lol. I can't even follow it ;) There are other papers about explaining Mystical experiences and others comparing Western and Eastern styles of consciousness. My favourite is the book review of Kabbalah. I like how this site allows me to go back and fix/reword old papers/ideas. This section really details what it is like to have a theory in the making and shows how ideas develop over time. One day my ideas/theory will be comprehensive to others outside my wacky brain :)
This section includes research done on the importance of emotional charge on ESP communication. It proposes that it is emotion communication that makes telepathy successful. The second paper in this section addresses dreams and dream interpretation. Two Dream interpretation methods (Freud's and Jung's) were analyzed to determine which method produced the most accurate results. The third paper presents research on Understanding Altered States of Conciousness and the last paper in this section is about Western Consciousness and how we are very individualized and perhaps out of balance due to us being lost in the Grand Illusion (Maya). The next paper looks at The Implication of Eastern Concepts on Western Ideals, to propose a potential balance between the two world views.
This section includes a paper about the subject-object dichotomy in Philosophy
This section begins with a work that is a detailed analysis of the screenplay/poem found in the Art section of this site. This paper looks at the research behind the play that inspired its manifestation (or why I wrote the play). It is hard to avoid the Book of Revelations when the topic of the Apocalypse comes up, so the next paper in this section is a comparison of the similarities and differences of the Book of Daniel and the Book of Revelations. Many similarities were found and the research leads one to beleive that we are in the dawning of the Age when we will see great changes in the world as we know it today.
This section includes papers on 3 pathways to happiness (physical, mental, emotional), followed by a paper on how to end prejudice, a paper on the polarization of the sexes is next (as it is hypothesized by this site that the true or pure unification of All That is in the Universe is solved by the reunification of the energy of the sexes ;). Finally, this section ends with an empirical thesis exploring the equal validation or rational and emotional styles.
This section contains a play or screenplay called the Grand Drama that is written entirely out of prose (the owner and creator of this website has personally written everything that appears on it). This work of art reveals a hidden message, one that may unlock the key to the mysteries of the universe! This page also includes a shortened poem of the Grand Drama and provides a link to a song that is about Plato's Analogy of the Cave (members only).
this is a collection of my poetry - enjoy!
This is a collection of my songs - enjoy! =)
This is my photo collection
Key to the Legend
Red = Philosophy
Blue = Physics
Yellow = mathematics
green = hard sciences
grey = psychology
the parts under construction are labeled as such or blanketed by <<< ____ >>> indicating personal notes to self to improve the site, or the layout of the information presented.
April 7, 2011A recent feminist development in the study of ethics suggests that men and women think differently in regard to morality (Rachels and Rachels 146). This debate could be called Justice vs. Caring as it has been said that men are more likely to use impersonal judicial guidelines and women are more likely to use an ethic of caring when it comes to making moral decisions (Coon and Mitterer 136). Contemporary feminists believe that the way women view morality is missing from the traditional theories and should be used to supplement older, rational ethics.
In Ancient Greece, the rational movement was so strong that emotion was thought to be inferior, get in the way of rational pursuits and make a person weak. Since emotions make a person weak, they became associated with women as they were considered to be the weaker sex (Tavris). The feminist issue can therefore be reduced to the stereotype that men are more rational and women more emotional. Therefore, the contemporary feminist debate reflects an age old debate over whether morality is based on rational or emotive tendencies.
This paper will give a brief background of rationalism (Aristotle/Mill) and emotivism (Ayer/Hume) then move to the contemporary version of justice vs. care (Baier/Rachels and Rachels). Ways of combining emotive and rational perspectives in regard to ethics will also be discussed.
Those who are rationalists believe reason to be superior as it distinguishes humans from other animals (Johnson and Reath 218). They believe humans are capable of virtue and morality, whereas other animals are not. Since reason is a characteristic that separates humans from other animals, it would imply that morality must therefore come from reason.
According to Aristotle, virtue was obtained through reason and the furthering of the intellect was considered “above all else” (Johnson and Reath 85). Therefore, a life of study is what brings happiness (Johnson and Reath 85). Aristotle devised a way of determining what is considered “right” or “good” which entailed finding the virtue between two extremes (the Golden Mean). Aristotle’s method was very rational, thus elevating reason above emotive pursuits. This rational evaluation technique was furthered by utilitarianism.
Utilitarianism, (originally created by Bentham) is much like Aristotle’s Golden Mean idea, but put to use to maintain the Greatest Happiness Principle. The Greatest Happiness Principle is a guideline to direct behaviour that leads to the maximizing of happiness and the minimizing of suffering (Johnson and Reath 220). It is rational because it requires reason to determine what outcome will lead to the greatest happiness for the greatest number of people. John Stuart Mill believed mental faculties were superior to bodily pleasures, and believed happiness came from being noble (Johnson and Reath 220). This is in line with Aristotle and elevates the rational over the emotional continuing the view that reason is superior. Mill goes as far to suggest the active principle should be dominant over the passive principle (Johnson and Reath 221). According to Taoism, the active principle is associated with the male and the passive, the female, thus implying inequality of the sexes.
Utilitarianism is rational in the sense that it considers all persons to be equal. This neglects emotive tendencies because when given the situation to save another human being, it is more likely one would choose a friend or family member over a complete stranger (Rachels and Rachels 116). Utilitarianism is therefore an impartial, cold calculation and disregards intimate relationships, affection, love and friendships (Rachels and Rachels 116). In The Need for More than Justice, Annette Baier reports that equality, as utilitarianism demands, does not satisfy emotional needs or the need for attachment. It rather shatters society by making persons individualized and autonomous (Johnson and Reath 448). She believes interdependence to be superior independence (448) and points out that utilitarian equality is not equal at all because laws tend to allot rights to in-groups and favour the elite (450). Women and children were “shunted to the bottom of the agenda” (Johnson and Reath 451). This suggests true impartiality and equality can only work in theory.
Utilitarianism also tends to focus on the larger group which points to another gender difference in thinking because “[w]omen specialize in the narrow sphere of intimate relationships [and] men specialize in the larger group” (qtd. in Rachels and Rachels 150). Therefore, any theory focusing on “impartiality” and the larger group could perpetuate dominance of male thought.
Rationalism has persisted over the years and the role of emotions, especially involved in pursuit of virtue and morality was neglected until Hume bravely suggested that “[r]eason is and ought to be the slave of the passions” (qtd. in Johnson and Reath 165).
Emotivism is the idea that what motivates a person to act is rooted in emotions such as feelings, desire (Johnson and Reath 165) or impulses of the passions (167). Because emotion is necessary to the ethic of care, feminists such as Annette Baier call men who support emotivism “honorary women” (qtd. in Rachels and Rachels 157). In regard to moral judgements, Ayer is convincing in his argument when he points out that statements involving moral assertions are emotional and not rational. According to Ayer, ethical or moral statements are an emotive evaluation of one’s opinion of what they feel to be “right” or “good,” not rational statements because they cannot be proven empirically to be true or false (Johnson and Reath 277). Rational statements are statements of fact and not personal evaluation. Therefore perhaps reason is not solely responsible for moral judgements and emotion should be taken into consideration.
David Hume agrees as he maintains that since reason is not responsible for impulses, then reason alone is not responsible for our actions (Johnson and Reath 167). He reaches this conclusion because the impulses of emotion are so strong that nothing, not even reason can impede them, especially when the will desires it. The major feeling in which Hume believes to motivate us to act is sympathy and it is sympathy that leads persons to act morally (165). This may have gotten Hume “honorary woman” status, but he believed women to be inferior to men (Lect.) and Baier found Hume to be too cold (Johnson and Reath 445).
The feeling of sympathy is getting closer to what feminists considered to be the ethic of care but there is a problem in using the word sympathy. Sympathy, as defined in psychology is a feeling of concern for others, but it is less likely to lead to altruistic behaviour because it involves what is referred to as personal distress (Coon and Mitterer). The relieving of personal distress becomes the target rather than the other person’s problem. Since the idea of individualism is generally seen to be a male dominated point of view, the term sympathy does not represent the type of emotionality that compels care or altruism.
Jeremy Rifkin prefers the term empathy. He believes empathy to be our “essential nature” (Rifkin 21) and a key underlying force that binds society together. Empathy involves taking the perspective of the other and includes an affective quality that matches the other person’s feelings. This is more representative of the feminist ethic of care. Rifkin states that societies were largely “egalitarian and matrilineal” up until around 4400 BC (22) and therefore helps pinpoint a time in history when “matriarchal forms of familial relations gave way to new patriarchal forms of power” (Rifkin 23). Since then, women have taken the role of the weaker or inferior sex and emotional relationships and caring was left to them. Empathy took the back burner to more “socially constructive ends” (Rifkin 21) placing reason on the pedestal creating an imbalance between reason and emotion. Therefore, it does seem that rational and emotional capacities are imbalanced.
Ethic of Care
Contemporary feminists such as Carol Gilligan and Annette Baier see this imbalance and believe male dominated ethics lead to the impersonal, cold calculation of justice. They believe empathy, family and togetherness should be supplemented (Rachels and Rachels 147). The male dominant view of ethics is concerned more with intrapersonal development and thus focuses more on the individual, whereas the feminine view of morality is more concerned with interpersonal relationships. In the 60’s this difference between men and women was seen as a stereotype (146), but now it is believed that men and women think differently about moral issues.
The idea that there is a difference came about with Kohlberg research and Theory of Moral Development in 1958. Kohlberg developed a scenario referred to as the “Heinz Dilemma” involving a man whose wife was deathly ill. The only cure was a prescription that was too expensive for the husband to afford. Heinz tried to make a deal with the pharmacist to no avail (Rachels and Rachaels 147). Kohlberg presented this scenario to children of various ages and asked them if stealing the drug to save his wife would be wrong. Using the results of his study he developed theory of morality that progresses in three levels, with two stages in each (see Figure 1 for the various stages).
From his data he concluded that girls were morally inferior to boys because making moral decisions based on interpersonal relationships (Stage 3), is not as mature as “moral judgements based on understanding social order” (Stage 4) (Santrock and Mitterer 137). This conclusion can only be true if one agrees that conforming to the social order is more important then interpersonal relationships. Girl’s answer to the dilemma revolved around compromises or finding solutions that worked for everybody, including the pharmacist. This desire to compromise and make all parties happy could be seen as moral reasoning at Stage 6 because the individual was faced with a dilemma between law and conscience. Therefore, it could be said that girls are morally superior to boys. Kohlberg’s research is often used as an example to show that interpretations can be arbitrary because the same data can be used to reach two opposing conclusions.
Disagreeing with Kohlberg’s interpretation, Gilligan conducted her own research with a different scenario. Her story was about a porcupine that asked a family of moles for shelter from the cold during the winter. The moles agreed, but the space was so tight that they were often scratched by the porcupine. They eventually asked the porcupine to leave, but the porcupine said that if they were not happy, then they should leave (Coon and Mitterer 137).
Gilligan found that boys were more likely to seek justice to resolve the issue by suggesting the porcupine should leave because it is the mole’s house. Girls were more likely to find compromises or solutions to accommodate everyone, like covering the porcupine with a blanket (Coon and Mitterer 137). Gilligan concluded that male dominance in morality has created a type of morality that is based on justice and autonomy, which excludes the importance of interpersonal relationships and empathy. She even suggests that males are slower to develop empathy and caring for others (137). Baier, however, says Gilligan neglects biological and social explanations for gender differences (Johnson and Reath 446). Is it true that women are more social and caring then men?
Do Men and Women Think Differently?
Recorded differences in language ability show that the female average is higher than the male average (Coon and Mitterer 431). This could point to a readiness for language and for women to be more social. Men tend to score slightly higher than women in math and spatial ability (Coon and Mitterer 431) which may support the idea that men specialize in larger groups and women specialize more in intimate relationships (Rachels and Rachels 150).
In other areas, evidence has shown that when given the option, one year old girls are more likely to fixate on a film of faces over cars and one year old boys are more likely to fixate on the cars. This could suggest females are more social than males (Rachels and Rachels 151). Brain-scans reveal that women are less likely to take pleasure in seeing those who have mistreated them suffer (150), displaying greater empathy.
Gender socialization may have contributed to the differences between men and women. Society and the gender socialization of stereotypes have placed women in the role of caring by confining them to the house and in charge of raising children. Being in these positions women would be more likely to adopt an ethic of care producing differences in attitudes in intimate relationships (Rachels and Rachels 151; Coon and Mitterer 431). Darwinian theories point to a difference in unconscious reproductive strategies, whereas men can father many children with many women and therefore cannot spend as much time with any given child. Women, however, invest in each child equally, potentially explaining how different attitudes could evolve (Rachels and Rachels 152).
To answer the question of whether men and women think differently, the difference between the averages, in language and spatial skills are not significant enough to make inferences (Coon and Mitterer 431). Also, Scholastic Assessment Test scores tend to show that men and women are increasingly thinking more and more alike (Coon and Mitterer 431). In regard to moral issues, further research into the matter has revealed that there is little to no difference in moral decision making as each sex utilizes both justice and caring strategies in their decision making (Coon and Mitterer 137).
Baier reports that persons tend to fluctuate between justice and care and the combination of the two is difficult (Johnson and Reath 445). She states that care centres on community and justice is concerned with autonomy and power (446). Care, Baier reports, challenges the “individualism of the Western tradition” (Johnson and Reath 449). Kohlberg would see justice as superior to caring. Virginia Held, carrying on the feminist standpoint, believes empathy and caring to be a better moral guideline than that of “abstract rules of reason or rational calculation” (Rachels and Rachels 150). But should one be considered superior to the other?
Balance the Talents
Baier states that “justice is only one virtue among many” (Johnson and Reath 444). Finding a compromise between rationalism and emotivism or justice and caring, may not be as difficult as Baier reports, especially if the human experience is both rational and emotional. Since the ethic of care is based on empathy, and empathy leads to compromises, the ethic of care can be incorporated into the Greatest Happiness Principle. This can be achieved because compromising usually brings happiness to all parties involved. Therefore, best moral conclusions come from a combination of “justice and caring [and/or] reason and emotion” (Coon and Mitterer 137). Agreeing with Baier, it is necessary for justice and care to be harmonized and male and female moral values unified (Johnson and Reath 454). Baier suggests that the domesticated woman perpetuates the stereotypes and keeps reason and justice apart. Each sex’s talents should be balanced. Therefore, it is illogical to pick sides or to see rationalism as superior to emotivism as they are both correct and useful in their own right, and in their own time.
Coon, D., & Mitterer, J. O. (2007). Introduction to Psychology. Australia: Thompson
Johnson, O. A., & Reath, A. (2007). Ethics: Selections from classical and contemporary writers.
Ed 10. Belmont: Thomson Wadsworth.
Rachels, J., & Rachels, S. (2010). The elements of moral philosophy. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Rifkin, J. (2009). The Empathic Civilization. New York: Penguin Group.
Santrock, J. W., & Mitterer, J. O (2004). Psychology 2. Toronto: McGraw-Hill
Tavris, C. (1992). The Mismeasure of Woman. New York: Simon and Schuster.