Premium
A Flight of Fancy on The Tangled Wing or How Not to Argue for More Women in Positions of Power
Author(s) -
SCHONSHECK JONATHAN
Publication year - 1987
Publication title -
journal of applied philosophy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.339
H-Index - 30
eISSN - 1468-5930
pISSN - 0264-3758
DOI - 10.1111/j.1468-5930.1987.tb00207.x
Subject(s) - argument (complex analysis) , power (physics) , safer , sociology , law and economics , epistemology , law , political science , philosophy , computer science , computer security , biochemistry , chemistry , physics , quantum mechanics
Numerous attempts have been made recently to argue from premises about ‘human nature’ to conclusions about social policy. This essay offers a critique of one such attempt, Melvin Konner's argument from the fact that women are more nurturing and less aggressive than men, to the claim that the world would be safer if women rather than men had control over the world's armaments, especially nuclear weapons (and thus they ought to occupy positions of power). I claim that the argument is badly flawed at several points, and that as such, it does not advance but impedes the movement towards equal access to governmental positions.