"without a grounding in basic biology, neither students nor teachers can negotiate the tangle of nature and culture that produces human sex differences. . . . science must be made a fundamental component of all women’s or gender studies programs."I am reminded of Mark Liberman's (2006) comment on the "innateness" of neurological findings:
"[Brooks (2006)] writes as if demonstrated group differences in brain activity, being "biological", must therefore be innate and essential characteristics of the groups, and not 'socially constructed'. But how else would socially constructed cognitive differences manifest themselves? In flows of pure spiritual energy, with no effect on neuronal activity, cerebral blood flow, and functional brain imaging techniques?"In turn, this reminds me of my favorite quote from Larry Cahill's (2006) review, "Why sex matters for neuroscience":
"as [De Vries {2004}] has effectively argued, neural sex differences can, in some cases, create behavioural sex differences, but might, in other cases, prevent them (when, for instance, they would be maladaptive) by compensating for sex differences in other physiological conditions, such as sex hormone levels."
I don't mean for this week to turn into a "defense of Difference Blog" week, but I felt that all three of these quotes, especially together, really summed up my reasons for this project. Like Paglia, I agree that social factors alone can not fully explain the observed differences in men and women. Like Liberman, I believe that scientific observations (especially in adult brains) are as likely to be the result of behavioral differences as the cause. Like Cahill, I believe that a neurological difference does not always lead to a behavioral difference. Therefore, I don't think that a project meant to explore sex and gender differences can afford to ignore social, neurological, or other physiological differences. However, I'm not prepared to draw conclusions about the causes -- and I hope that the ambiguity doesn't scare you off.
5 comments:
It's that ambiguity that makes it interesting.
I'm picturing the two of us as color commentators on a sports game - and the game is the nature/nurture debate. It's not that we're particularly vested in either side winning, but the struggle is fun to watch.
Pass the popcorn.
No popcorn here. How about donuts? *grin*
Great quotes -- especially the manifestation one. Nice to meet you :)
Nice to meet you, too! I saw your post last night, and have been trying to figure out something clever to say.
"hi" is perfectly acceptable, I suppose. :)
Post a Comment