Are all Swans White in the Social Imagination...?

 

Summary of Karl Popper's Theory...

• Karl Popper believed that scientific knowledge is provisional – What does that mean? It means the best we can do at the moment.
• Popper is known for his attempt to refute the classical positivist account of the scientific method, by replacing induction with the falsification principle.
• The Falsification Principle, proposed by Karl Popper, is a way of demarcating science from non-science. It suggests that for a theory to be considered scientific it must be able to be tested and conceivably proven false.
• For example, the hypothesis that "all swans are white," can be falsified by observing a black swan.
• For Popper, science should attempt to disprove a theory, rather than attempt to continually support theoretical hypotheses.

Karl Popper is prescriptive, and describes what science should do (not how it actually behaves). Popper is a rationalist and contended that the central question in the philosophy of science was distinguishing science from non-science.

Karl Popper in The Logic of Scientific Discovery emerged as a major critic of inductivism, which he saw as an essentially old-fashioned strategy.

Popper replaced the classical observationalist-inductivist account of the scientific method with falsification (i.e. deductive logic) as the criterion for distinguishing scientific theory from non-science.

All inductive evidence is limited: we do not observe the universe at all times and in all places. We are not justified therefore in making a general rule from this observation of particulars.

According to Popper, scientific theory should make predictions which can be tested, and the theory rejected if these predictions are shown not to be correct.  He argued that science would best progress using deductive reasoning as its primary emphasis, known as critical rationalism. 

Do you see the difference? You should because there is a huge difference. The problem with today's science is that its politicized and marketed to fit an agenda. Now, you should definitely see the difference between science and knowledge. As Popper wrote, scientists should test their theories not to verify them but to falsify them and hence...become even more accurate.

*Source ~ The Logic of Scientific Discovery (1935) by Karl Popper is a classic work on the purpose of science and knowledge. Scientists should test their theories not to verify them, but to falsify them, and hence become even more accurate.

Community of the Cultish... in the Social Imagination?

 

In order to answer that question, we must look at what defines a cult. 

    A Cult: a group or movement exhibiting a great or excessive devotion or dedication to some person, idea, or thing, and employing unethically manipulative techniques of persuasion and control designed to advance the goals of the group’s leaders, to the actual or possible detriment of members, their families, or the community. 

    Unethically manipulative techniques of persuasion and control include but are not limited to: isolation from former friends and family, use of special methods to heighten suggestibility and subservience, powerful group pressures, information management, suspension of individuality or critical judgment, promotion of total dependency on the group and fear of leaving it, etc. [https://pridesource.com/article/definition-of-a-cult/].

What really goes on in the LGBT community? Is there anything cultish about it? Yes, sure there is. How? The LGBT community is a radical gender ideology group which promotes itself as a minority social movement exhibiting a great or excessive devotion or dedication to an idea which is that homosexuals and other self-identifying genders are 'normal' though by biological parameters... false. 

Indeed, the LGBT community does have manipulative techniques of persuasion i.e. pride parades for one which are designed to advance the goals of the group and its leaders to the detriment of all other non LGBT social actors in society. 

Do they promote fear of leaving it? Yes, through psychological pressures such as criticizing and belittling which are to punish a leaver and to label them as a kind of cop-out, or more unfavorably, a tragically misled individual who is being pushed by current moral majority norms to behave accordingly... Some states, have forbidden people to say otherwise.

Now, this post is not in reference to conservative homosexuals who do not partake of the LGBT community and there are many... a little known fact among those in the LGBT community. The purpose of this post is solely to address the LGBT community as a thing in itself. And, it is.

Is it a cult? By and large, it certainly is in the social imagination. Why is that? Because, in the social imagination, for anything to be a 'thing', agreement is necessary. Firstly, for such ideas to form and secondly, for them to be made into a 'social' thing and then to be put into action through subversive means until its recognized by the mainstream as a thing. 

Interestingly, the social imagination is apart from strict concrete physical boundaries such as biology and that is because its not tangible in nature. Yet, most of what we consider to be reality stems from the social imagination. 

Hence, the LGBT community finds its greatest support in the imagination. Ideas such multiple genders and or trangenderism are inherent characteristics of the LGBT community and they can only come to fruition as a thing in itself in the social imagination. 

Now, for such ideas to step out from the intangible of the social imagination and into the tangible world, there must be enough agreement and also agreed upon determination to bring them forward into the world of normalized morality and or agreed upon and necessarily crystalized social facts. 

However, that does not ensure longevity. In many instances, such cultish ideas that come forward from the social imagination, often fade unless the moral majority agrees. So, after a few years, if agreement for such a thing weakens, then it is no longer a sought out fact but an artifact to be tossed aside or buried as a thing of the past. 

Against the LGBT community and in support of long standing social facts, we can look at long lasting social agreements that are most definitely biologically based... Hence, nuclear families with biological children have been the solid standard for social sustainability.

 

Who Ja Wanna be When You Grow up in the Social Imagination...

      

      Yes, it’s possible for men to become pregnant and give birth to children of their own. In fact, it’s probably a lot more common than you might think. In order to explain, we’ll need to break down some common misconceptions about how we understand the term “man.” Not all people who were assigned male at birth (AMAB) identify as men. Those who do are “cisgender” men. Conversely, some people who were assigned female at birth (AFAB) identify as men. These folks may be “transgender” men or transmasculine people ~ Source: [https://www.healthline.com/health/transgender/can-men-get-pregnant?fbclid=IwAR07V-q5LYLG95TZRt3E1NEac4PPwHuMbpXOAbV21gCTpdoT4Iuqozg4DSo#TOC_TITLE_HDR_1].

      Society has traditionally taught us that there are two genders: man and woman. We’re told that those who are assigned male at birth are men and those who are assigned female at birth are women. But gender isn’t an either/or scenario. It’s a spectrum. Ultimately, the concepts of gender and sex are socially constructed. This means that we as a society assign sex and gender to people based on socially agreed-upon characteristics. This doesn’t mean that body parts and functions are “made up” — it just means that the way we categorize and define each of these things could actually be different.Gender identity is your own personal understanding of your gender and how you want the world to see you ~ Source: [https://www.healthline.com/health/sex-vs-gender?utm_source=ReadNext#gender-identity].

Sure, it sounds open, loving, tolerant, inclusive... but is gender identity really based on your own personal understanding? After all, you/we live in a social imagination and who you are and are not matters. 

Let's look at the above texts and try to make some sense of this argument... 

1- Yes, it’s possible for men to become pregnant. While its possible for men to declare that they have become pregnant in the meaning that a biological male goes into the office and announces "we're pregnant",  he, as a participant (with a female) in the biological creation of a baby, is affirming and confirming that and thus allows him to declare that he is 'pregnant'. However, can a man have a baby, as in conceive and give birth as a biological, psychological and spiritual male? No! 

2- We’ll need to break down some common misconceptions about how we understand the term “man". First, there are no misconceptions unless you are able to first show how the so called misconception became common place and why it is still considered as such. And, what evidence shows that it should be changed. In the social imagination, being fair, you would also have to show data confirming that a majority of social actors agree that the current understanding of  the term 'man' is wrong which no one does. 

3-  Not all people who were assigned male at birth are men...Conversely, some people who were assigned female at birth are women. In order to address this statement, we have to find out who did the assigning and why. Let's say that we did find out. Babies were biologically assigned because they had a majority of certain physical markers that could describe their sex- male or female. Yes, some think gender is not sex (body parts). Some say gender is fluid and has to do more with personality. 

Sure, we could agree that some men have a more nurturing or mothering or feminine personality and visa versa. Women could have a personality that might be more bold or aggressive, and fatherly, or masculine. But, in order to really agree on that, we would have to deconstruct those adjectives in order to understand them when applied to understanding what terms like 'man/woman' are. 

4-  Gender is a spectrum. Ultimately, the concepts of gender and sex are socially constructed. In order to agree on that, let's use the wordage from the above... 'we as a society assign sex (there's that word assign... what does that mean? Well, just as I said above it means we would have to go all the way back to med school) and we assign gender to people based on socially agreed-upon characteristics. Mmm...This doesn’t mean that body parts and functions are “made up” — it just means that the way we categorize and define each of these things could actually be different. Different like how? Gender identity is your own personal understanding of your gender and how you want the world to see you... Oh, Really?

Sorry, gender is not a spectrum. We cannot categorize and define each of these things as possibly different... Either its a girl or a boy in all forms and thoughts and character. If we cannot agree on that, we cannot pretend we do and we cannot say that they could be different. In fact, agreeing that a girl is a female based on her physical attributes, thoughts and character and a boy is a male for the same reasons is how we have been socially constructing sex and gender for thousands of years.

A stable society, needs certain things to be either black or white. We have to know what something is or  is not. I know who I am and who I am not. You may not agree but then I cannot force you to agree either. However, in order for things to go well for all of us in the same soup of life, we will have to agree on quite a lot in those terms: black or white (this is not about skin color). 

So, if I am wearing a dress in public you can be sure I am a girl/woman. And, if I wear a man's suit, you can be sure I am a boy/man. Your mind likes images to be easily identifiable; its how your brain works for your own safety and mental harmony that you automatically search for markers that confirm what you know or don't know.

If I am fully pregnant (9 months) with a maternity dress on, you can be sure I am a fertile female woman, a soon-to-be mother, a wife and not a man. If I smoke a cigar in the waiting room of the OB wing of the hospital in my suit, pacing, and fiercely pulling at my tie, you can be sure I am a male, a man, a father, a husband and not a woman.  

I say that because those images tell us and have told us about society for a long time. Those images instruct us as to what we can expect from such gendered social roles; and even more, we know what we can expect from such male-female sexual encounters... that being, children which grow into people which again create more people which creates a society in a place over time. 

Sure, there could be a man inside the 'pregnant' woman's head and visa a versa... they could both be acting out who they imagine or feel that they are; and if they are good at it, believe it, they could convince many people. But, believe me, if that baby is born on the floor of the emergency room, everyone there will know who is who and who is not regardless of who they say they are or who they wanna be or wish they were in the social imagination. 

Gender is not fluid. Society can be as some days are commi ce comme ca..  but if we want to live and survive we need crystallization or crystal clear definitions of what things are and are not... as most things in the social imagination require clear definitions in order for agreement to happen; especially, since in agreement we find truth ... some things just necessarily have to be concrete.  

 

Gender understanding...  "Fool me once, shame on you... fool me twice, shame on me!"

 

 

 

*PS. Can you make the argument that it doesn't matter what gender you are? Sure, but why make it an argument to begin with if it doesn't matter.