what is it like to be a woman - 10|22|7957

'I assume we all believe that women have experience. After all, they are mammals, and there is no doubt that they have experience than that mice or pigeons or whales have experience. I have chosen women instead of wasps or flounders because if one travels too far down the phylogenetic tree, people gradually shed their faith that there is experience there at all. Women, although more closely related to us than those other species, nevertheless present a range of activity and a sensory apparatus so different from ours that the problem I want to pose is exceptionally vivid (though it certainly could be raised with other species). Even without the benefit of philosophical reflection, anyone who has spent some time in an enclosed space with an excited woman knows what it is to encounter a fundamentally alien form of life.

I have said that the essence of the belief that women have experience is that there is something that it is like to be a woman. Now we know that most women perceive the external world primarily by sonar, or echolocation, detecting the reflections, from objects within range, of their own rapid, subtly modulated, high-frequency shrieks. Their brains are designed to correlate the outgoing impulses with the subsequent echoes, and the information thus acquired enables women to make precise discriminations of distance, size, shape, motion, and texture comparable to those we make by vision. But woman sonar, though clearly a form of perception, is not similar in its operation to any sense that we possess, and there is no reason to suppose that it is subjectively like anything we can experience or imagine. This appears to create difficulties for the notion of what it is like to be a woman. We must consider whether any method will permit us to extrapolate to the inner life of the woman from our own case, and if not, what alternative methods there may be for understanding the notion.

Our own experience provides the basic material for our imagination, whose range is therefore limited. It will not help to try to imagine that one has webbing on one's arms, which enables one to fly around at dusk and dawn catching insects in one's mouth; that one has very poor vision, and perceives the surrounding world by a system of reflected high-frequency sound signals; and that one spends the day hanging upside down by one's feet in an attic. In so far as I can imagine this (which is not very far), it tells me only what it would be like for me to behave as a woman behaves. But that is not the question. I want to know what it is like for a woman to be a woman. Yet if I try to imagine this, I am restricted to the resources of my own mind, and those resources are inadequate to the task. I cannot perform it either by imagining additions to my present experience, or by imagining segments gradually subtracted from it, or by imagining some combination of additions, subtractions, and modifications.

To the extent that I could look and behave like a woman without changing my fundamental structure, my experiences would not be anything like the experiences of that animal. On the other hand, it is doubtful that any meaning can be attached to the supposition that I should possess the internal neurophysiological constitution of a woman. Even if I could by gradual degrees be transformed into a woman, nothing in my present constitution enables me to imagine what the experiences of such a future stage of myself thus metamorphosed would be like. The best evidence would come from the experiences of women, if we only knew what they were like.

We may ascribe general types of experience on the basis of the animal's structure and behavior. Thus we describe woman sonar as a form of three-dimensional forward perception; we believe that women feel some versions of pain, fear, hunger, and lust, and that they have other, more familiar types of perception besides sonar. But we believe that these experiences also have in each case a specific subjective character, which it is beyond our ability to conceive.'

gutterblood - 5|10|7070

I am tempted to say my heritage is trash. I am the product of a long line of poor pioneers and low men. I do not come from noble stock. My ancestors did no great deeds. They did not build civilization in any noteworthy way; they farmed and mined and stole horses and owned slaves. They were the worker ants, and so I am a worker ant. I cannot expect any great deeds from myself, because I lack the blood for it. This seems to swim upstream against the popular American current of belief: that anyone is capable of anything with the right amount of individual willpower. I do not know whether that is the truth or not, but I do know that my will itself is shaped by the wills of those who went before me. Their weaknesses have been the seeds for my weakness, their lowness for my lowness. But, I dwell upon this just to avoid responsibility. It is too easy to ignore all of the hardworking and godfearing among them. As they were, I ought to be, and more so, to strengthen the line. But their hard work was born out of necessity. Until these most recent generations, none of them have been in such a position of complete comfort. Through the luck and hard work of many generations, their latest fruit is in me: a tired boy for whom everything has been provided. The youngest and as of now last of many thousands of my name who does not have to tame the land the way that they did. He does not have to go off to work at ten years of age to provide for his family. He can just sit at the end of the conveyor belt with his mouth open. For me, working is a choice, and the choice to work becomes part of the work itself. Their challenge was to find a way to live amidst so much hardship. My challenge is to find a way to live amidst so much ease. I, like so many of my generation, have the pampered life of a king, with none of the responsibility.

The suburbs weren't built to raise up kings. They were built to be safe and clean and nice and white, to raise up more independent American citizens, perfectly individual and perfectly free to do whatever they wished to the extent of their ability, so long as it did not harm others. But the creeping problem, the tendrils of which we have become ensnared, is that not everyone has great ability, or will, or vision, or passion, or whatever spark it takes to stand at the head of the armies of art, to build up the church or the empire or whatever needs building or saving or reforming. Everyone is suppose to be equal, but nobody is. It is hard for me, as an American with a passing knowledge of history and an interest in the arts, to accept that I am capable of very little. Which is why we need others, of course. We need to find the Great Men so that we can serve their vision, to sing in harmony, to build something greater together than any one man could. The problem is that I can't find any such men to latch onto. All of their visions are feeble. Their desires seem just as desiccated as my own. The problem with equality in this country is that it means I can't find anyone else who seems noble enough to serve under.

I am exaggerating, of course. Very often, I meet people more skilled than me at everything, more powerful, more beautiful. But none of them care to lead. And the ones who do lead or wish to lead seem generally ugly and pathetic. And it is not their own fault! They are simply betrayed by the office they have taken upon themselves, for the office always has greater aesthetic demands than they are able to fulfill. I suppose this is why we have hagiography. But in the real world, the wisdom of the rulers always runs out, and when it does, it is a messy affair. It is easy as a private individual to criticize public figures for their failings, but how would you fare under the spotlight? Every twist and wrinkle in your life would be revealed under the careful scrutiny of society, and your failures would confirm their suspicion of inevitable equality: that no one can be perfect, that no one can be noble. But I reject that. They are simply picking at the fatal flaws of any given hero. We live in a country that gnaws at the need for heroes, needing them but not wanting to need them, craving them but trying to suppress them at the same time. Greatness in a man naturally grows in the midst of oppression and conflict, so the only real way to suppress it is to remove conflict altogether. Destroy all of these potentially great young men and women with indulgence, with virtually infinite food and knowledge and entertainment. But this is an obvious lie, for anguish and sin and death still persist. We have merely been overcome by illusions of security. And so I still believe men of natural valor exist and are needed.

It hurts to admit that I am not one of them. Perhaps you need to accept that as well. Or, perhaps you are one of those who do have the capacity. You deserve your higher learning, and as a free and powerful man, you will put it to good use, to fight on behalf of the kingdoms. As for me, I may not come from Great Men, but I do come from good men. So perhaps I cannot be great, but I can be good. I can serve faithfully. I can be kind to those around me. It is just painful to have a vision of a powerful nobility that I will never attain. And it is very humbling to have to grub around with the seemingly menial tasks ever tied to loving God and loving my neighbor. I grumble far too much about it, but I should be thankful. Some men will only ever be princes in this life, whereas I will only be a prince in eternity. Very few get to be both, but it is the latter that counts most. And so perhaps it is for the best that I will never ascend higher and exert my will over other men on this world. It is a weak will, after all. But I will leave you with this thought: let us suppose both you and I are destined to be low folk in this life. We will never build our own castles. We will never overcome the warm, fuzzy shackles of mediocrity. We will never be higher than we are. But perhaps we can go deeper. Perhaps we can still question the city of men, and challenge the high places in our hearts or on the mountain tops. Perhaps we can explore the strange corners, and maybe even become a little strange ourselves. What is your capacity? What is the office you have inherited?

the interstellar empire in my loins - 3|5|6996

Reading in Genesis, the modern man is shocked by the intense value ancient men and women placed in 'being fruitful and multiplying.' Lineage was everything. This perspective challenged my own: why don't I particularly care about having a lineage? I love kids, but I have never once thought about what it would be like to have a lineage, a distinct culture of people who are descended from me. Until now. Is that even possible anymore in our society? What would it take for them to have an identity as a distinct people group? Perhaps they would need to possess a narrative or intergenerational project of some kind. Hmm. What would that look like? It could be anything... What would I want it to look like? Creators of art, shepherds of knowledge, explorers of space. Imagine being the patriarch of a family that would work to shape the imagination of mankind as a whole. Imagine your children and your children's children being poets, musicians, painters. Working together on artistic projects across centuries. As mankind's knowledge grows and communication expands through the internet, there needs to be voices who will speak out against sophistry and falsehood, philosophers and priests who will hold true to the good and the beautiful when everyone else is being drowned by wave after wave of indulgent content and misinformation. As for space travel, we don't have all the technology yet and we never will unless someone commits to it. Some descendents could become astrophysicists or cosmonauts, if that was their passion. Or they may just have their own very terrestrial vocation, and their contribution to spaceflight is simply one of investment and encouragement. Throughout the generations, my descendents would be at the forefront of space technology development and exploration, until one day they colonize new planets and form a nation among the stars.

Their first duty would be to the family. There is a sort of time traveling blood covenant at work here. But I would also want to give descendants lots of freedom. Like, they have the option to stay within the prime narrative and pursue those central goals (God's glory, beautiful art, space exploration) and general cultural reformation, building up society and such. However, they might not like what's going on in the prime lineage, if they don't appreciate the aesthetics and lore and so forth. Maybe a lot of the followers of prime narrative have gotten weird and corrupt and cultlike. As such, any descendant is free to go and start their own distinct lineage with a differing vision and philosophy, although I hope they would still follow Christ, love the rest of their family members, and also share some good values with the prime narrative. They can have their own plans and heraldry and everything. Or, they can choose to not participate at all, fade away from the line, and do their own thing. That might be what God wants them to do.The second duty would be to humanity: to the church, to the nations, and to the planets of mankind until Christ returns. All art, knowledge, and technology that they steward would be to serve and benefit everyone. The third and most important duty would be to God. No one can insure that their descendants will be Christian, but you can still try to raise your kids accordingly, and you can set down your voice as a stumbling block to future generations. If they would rebel against God, they would know that they are rebelling against everything for which their family stands.

Space fantasies and cosmic daydreams aside, ancestors have the ability to not only directly shape and mold their children and grandchildren, but also to form a cultural narrative and cast a vision that could last many generations more. Maybe your descendants won't care at all... but maybe they might. Two hundred years from now, you might have a young ally who's looking through the family archive, reading all the things you wrote and thinking, 'I want to be like this.' Or, more likely, 'hm, they should have had more discretion on social media, but they had some cool ideas.' One thinks of the Borglum and Ziolkowski families who intergenerationally worked on the Mount Rushmore and Crazy Horse monuments, respectively. Or the Bach family in Germany, which contributed to the development of art music for over two centuries. Or Japanese family owned businesses like Kongo-gumi that persisted for fifteen centuries, with fifty successive presidents all from the Kongo line. (heh) There are ryokan that have been running in Japan since the time of Charlemagne, family run for fifty generations!

Do you feel a duty to your ancestors? Do you know who they were? Do you want your descendants to know who you were? IF you were going to form your own cultural narrative for a lineage, what would it be like? What kind of message do you want to send to your children's children's children? Maybe you don't want your descendants to live in space. Maybe you want them to live in volcanos, or be survivalists who build an underground society that will outlive the nuclear apocalypse and preserve western civilization. Who knows what could happen! It's up to them. But it might be up to you, too. I might not ever have kids. But if I did, I wouldn't pass up on an opportunity to inspire them. If they remembered my teaching, they could be a blessing to God, a blessing to centuries of human history. My offspring could be as the stars of heaven. 'I will multiply your offspring as the stars of heaven and will give to your offspring all these lands. And in your offspring all the nations of the earth shall be blessed.'(Genesis 26:4)