Philosopher views
Basic Ideas And Principles
Download 5.81 Mb.
|
- Navigate this page:
- Application To Debate
- Bibliography
Basic Ideas And PrinciplesThough Eisler is most definitely committed to feminism, she is not traditional. She offers what most would consider a radical perspective. Eisler believes that most of the “popular culture” battles that shape our world (communism versus capitalism, religion versus secularism, East versus West) are really are just “very superficial manifestations’ of tension between two dramatically different modes of social organization. This struggle, she argues, has been raging for centuries upon centuries, dating back through recorded history and well into pre-history. She identifies the two different types of societies as “partnership” and “dominator” models, respectively. Traditional feminist theory holds that past effeminate societies were ruled my women in matriarchies. Eisler radically challenges that assumption, concluding instead that these cultures were “partnership” oriented societies which forswore hierarchical gender relationships in favor of an egalitarian paradigm. From Eisler’s perspective, the notion of domination being an integral part of human life is a conceptual trap. She notes that the archaeological evidence does not support the idea that men were placed in positions of subordination, and argues that the evidence supports the existence of peaceful, agrarian (or Neolithic) societies. Specifically, Eisler notes that the Biblical story of the Garden of Eden may be the ultimate end of “folk memories” which long for the days of partnership and harmony with nature that these early societies represented. She reaches the same conclusion about the myth of Atlantis, which she calls a “garbled recollection” of the ancient Minoan civilization, a “remarkably peaceful and creative culture” where, she believes, partnership reigned. Rather than accept the traditional terminology, then, of “patriarchy”--rule by the father--vs. “matriarchy”--rule by the mother--Eisler proposes a new, and she says, more precise set of terms. Using the Greek root words for man (“andros”) and ruled (“kratos”), Eisler refers to a dominator culture as an androcracy. Her alternative, the partnership culture, she calls by the new term gylany, from the Greek gyno (“woman”) and the Greek word an, coming from andros (“man”), thus implying a synthesis of the two genders. Eisler believes that certain cultural epochs are marked by social shifts that lead us toward partnership or towards domination. She calls this view of history “cultural transformation theory,” and says that we are now living in a time of “extreme disequilibrium” where the old order can be shaken to its foundations. Eisler refuses to believe that these shifts are inevitable, instead claiming that people within cultures can shape the transformation for either good or ill. She contends that during our pre-history, “there seems to have been a very different direction in the mainstream cultural revolution, more a partnership direction,” but that in a similar period of “extreme disequilibrium” in our pre-history, there was a shift towards the dominator model. Similarly, our actions today can determine whether we make the shift a positive one or a negative one. Application To DebateEisler offers a different perspective from many people committed to feminism. She sees feminism as a struggle for liberation of women, but envisions a society where no group would need to be liberated--that is, a group where burdens, responsibilities and respect would be shared equally. This gives her immense credence in gender-issues debates. She also offers interesting and compelling historical and cultural data for her claims, which can only help the cause. The criticism she offers of Enlightenment philosophers can also be useful. She sees the kind of pure rationality embraced by most traditional Western thinkers as linear, mechanistic, and flawed. She considers such ideas insufficient to spark the transformation she feels we need. In that sense, her views make useful tools against these types of thought. Eisler views technology in a different way from many feminist theorists. Many radicals view technology as something to be almost uniformly feared as a linear expression of Western dominance. Eisler has two interesting comments on the matter. First, she argues that our technology does not produce our culture, but it is our culture that determines whether technology is beneficial or not. She points out that under dominator societies, technology has almost always been a euphemism for weaponry, while in some of the partnership-based societies she studies, none of the weapons stockpiles or exploitative technologies are evident. Thus, she argues that Blade technologies are a product of Blade culture, and not proof that technology is evil in and of itself. Second, communications technology is one of the ways Eisler feels partnership can be fostered. This kind of technology, she says, is more decentralized and grassroots than almost any other we have seen, allowing progressive movements to organize and connect with each other. These ideas are useful in debating technological issues. Eisler also offers substantive analysis why other transformative, allegedly revolutionary strategies such as socialism, communism, etc., fail to provide partnership. In Eisler’s calculus, power relationships are fundamental, and before we challenge those basic hierarchies, we fail to provide partnership. In Eislers calculus, power relationships are fundamental, and before we challenge those basic hierarchies, we cannot achieve any great leap forward. She discusses the shortcomings of many philosophies which fail to address the gender question in the context of domination versus partnership. She also offers defense of many human values-including progress, equality, and freedom--as means to the end of gylany. This can be useful to debaters in formulating and defending a value stance based on one of these three ideals. BibliographyRiane Eisler, THE CHALICE AND THE BLADE, originally published in 1987, revised edition, 1995, Harper Collins. Riane Eisler, THE PARTNERSHIP WAY, 1990, Harper Collins. Riane Eisler, SACRED PLEASURE, 1995, Harper San Francisco. Georg and Linda Feurstein, Editors, VOICES ON THE THRESHOLD OF TOMORROW, 1993. Directory: uploads uploads -> 587 Return function, r i(X) r i(0) r i(1) r i(2) r i(3) 1 0 2 4 6 Thermal Station, I 2 0 1 5 6 3 0 3 5 6 10 uploads -> Department of science and humanities department of mathematics part-a questions and answers uploads -> The Case Against the nypd’s Quota-Driven ‘Broken Windows’ Policing What Is It? uploads -> For want of a nail uploads -> Ownership Models There are two different types of ownership models uploads -> Police Militarization uploads -> City of rising star regular meting thursday, july 14, 2016 uploads -> Township of winfield uploads -> Stop Militarizing Law Enforcement Act of 2014 uploads -> The Black Panther Party’s Ten-Point Program What We Want Now! Download 5.81 Mb. Share with your friends:
|