Tell me what you think about this??

I got a nice feeling of relief as I read it knowing the truth of what is being said.

 

I don't understand it.

 

Sure we're noble, we're also quite helpless in the big scheme of things, I'd rather not be crushed by something out of my own power, but I guess no one chooses to.

The second part gave me an eerie, think happy thoughts vibe.

 

I like the excerpt overall.

Although I agree in general, I actually feel quite bothered by writings that refer to people or humankind as 'man', 'mankind', etc. :rant: It's a primary reason why I am turned off certain writings. I known that's 'the way things were' back then, and still are in some parts of the world - but it pisses me off. I am not invisible. I expect and deserve to be treated with more respect and validation as a human being.

If it wasn't for that, I would probably enjoy it more. But it's still insightful otherwise.

 

You're a woman are you not?

 

That's what she was saying, she's not very happy about it being the universal masculine. I agree that it is rather sexist, but so would a universal feminine (unless you would rather use Sie [neuter term].)

Also, I love the quote. I completely agree, we should spend more effort thinking, instead of other useless goals (universal domination...).

 

Yep, wouldn't it be great if we had a gender-neutral pronoun

What are you saying Quinlan?

I think you mean humankind. I don't think he excludes women from the whole of the idea, as you said, but there were obviously reasons for why that language was used at the time. That language is a simple reflection of the sexism that was a way of life at the time.

 

i dunno what crosses my mind when i read it...but it was a very interesting piece of writing that's for sure...

 

:yo:

 

Basically, though humans are frail beings (compared to say planets or stars) we're alive; we can think. Not only that, but it's our responsibility to utilize our mental capacities to their utmost in pursuit of morality and knowledge. That's what I get out of it. (Duty would be proud of me! )

 

That the writer picked the one thing something else hasnt got and decided that he was noble because of it. Seems arbitrary to me.

 

What's wrong with using mankind as short for humankind? Humankind sounds clumsy.

 

I do think that it shouldn't bother people because now, most people don't use it in the direct meaning of it. However, I still won't use terms like that because it does make me unconfortable, despite me telling myself that it shouldn't.

 

Interesting... like interesting wrong?

 

I thought so . I was just trying to instigate more responses to my comments because I tend to kill a thread. I notice that I am the last comment on many threads, although not on this forum.