Is transgenderism ultimately rooted in platonic metaphysics?

>>8631235
Sauce?

>>8631235
The female mind and ideal body is a good description of transgenderism but tell me more about Platonic metaphysics and their implications here?

Nope, not at all.
It's nothing more than extreme body modification, it needs no justification other than some form of desires.

There's a part of your brain responsible for gender identity. That part of your brain sorts people you see into male or female, this is one of the most basic instincts needed in mammals. This part of your brain also sorts you into male or female as well.

Transgenderism happens when this part of the brain irreversibly sorts itself incorrectly.

>>8631761
>There's a part of your brain responsible for gender identity.
Remind me, which part is it again?

>>8631766
Wait for neuroscience to find out

>>8631773
>i-i'm right, just wait for science to prove it!

>>8631773
This sounds like a problem for Jean-Francois Gariépy

>>8631235
>Is transgenderism ultimately rooted in platonic metaphysics?
No because it's rooted in mental illness. Transgenderism is a delusion and all the arguments for it are just panicked flailing to justify the truth of the delusion, so there's nothing so detached as Platonic metaphysics behind it.

But yes, if it had been an idea that someone sat down and developed dispassionately, it would be based on Platonic metaphysics or some system allowing for strong mind/body duality (say, faith in a fallible God who happens to pour some of the souls into the wrong containers when making people).

>>8632624
I know I'm not a real woman, I just want to look at way.

>>8631761
Pseudoscientific garbage.

>>8632624
>Transgenderism is a delusion
You have no more to back that opinion up than Platonic metaphysicians do.
>Captcha is BUSH MORDEN for those who remember Babylon 5

>>8631235
I've never met a trans woman who "thought" like a cis woman. Sorry, I recognize gender dysphoria but I don't buy the "female mind" meme.

>>8631727
I'm not OP, but Platonic idealism (aka essentialism) has to do with the odd point that we perceive a world that contains discrete objects (i.e., many objects that are distinct from each other) that seem to have a particular identity that everyone agrees on. Furthermore, the identity of an object doesn't seem to come from its properties per se, but from a certain je ne sais quoi.
For example, most everyone can pick out a chair if one is in front of them, but it's notoriously hard to nail down exactly what makes a chair a chair. It's not, for example, the case that chairs have four legs, or that chairs have backs, or that chairs have a flat surface. It isn't even the case that a chair is something people sit on, because people sit on things other than chairs and some chairs are purely decorative.
In his famous allegory of the cave, Plato argues that there are ideal objects, or "essences," that project onto the material world in the form of particular objects, so that a particular chair is an expression of the ideal chair (or the essence-of-chairness), and our perceptual faculties give us some access to this relationship. Regardless of the truth of this position, it's pretty much what everyone believes about the identity-of-objects problem (even if they haven't heard this particular description).
So yes, obviously this is a huge factor in how transgender people regard their own gender, since one has to believe that one's gender is, in a sense, something other than one's body or "the way the chips fell"; there has to be something else that one is making reference to in saying one's gender is "wrong." Personally I believe that transgenderism has to do with how one is regarded by others, that it's an issue of "intersubjectivity," but that's a whole other branch of philosophy.

>>8632624
>No because it's rooted in mental illness. Transgenderism is a delusion and all the arguments for it are just panicked flailing to justify the truth of the delusion, so there's nothing so detached as Platonic metaphysics behind it.

How do you define mental illness though? Because mental illness isn't a cause, it's just a category of a particular type of psychological phenotype.

And what part of transgenderism is delusion? Are you stating this on the whole? Typicality among members of the population?

Could you elaborate a bit as I don't understand how this refutes the OP's points.
Mental Illness isn't an explanation of cause it's just a medical diagnosis no?

>>8631766
>>8632675
Not them but there's a basis for this.

>Dating back to the first half of the twentieth century, research on laboratory animals has shown that the formation of external genitalia is not the end point of the sex differentiation process; virilisation of the male brain ensures that male and female brains develop along sex differentiated pathways, largely predicting/correlating with future sexual and non-sexual behaviours, although it has been shown, in androgen treated female rhesus macaque monkeys, that sexual behaviours can be masculinised without much evidence of genital masculinisation (Goy, et al., 1988; Phoenix et al., 1959; Gooren, 1999; Gooren and Kruijver, 2002). Usually, however, these aspects of differentiation are consistent with each other and are also regarded as depending upon the karyotype. Typically, in humans there are 46 chromosomes arranged in pairs. In females, one pair is composed of two X chromosomes. In males, one pair is composed of an X and a Y chromosome. The chromosome derived from the mother is invariably an X, and that derived from the father may be either X or Y.

Some recent studies demonstrated the same applies to rats. Virilized female rates acted like male rats, mounting other rats and trying to hump them. It's reasonable to think transsexuality works the same way in humans, especially since trans brains show signs of being feminized/virilized in ways that must take place in the womb.

>>8632813
>I've never met a trans woman who "thought" like a cis woman.
How would you contrast the way a cis woman thinks from the trans woman you have met?

To preface this is psuedo-scientific but I think it's apt enough in an anecdotal conversation. And I'm just using one personality model here, but personality/temperament are fairly easily transferable between the many different models.

Most, like approaching 3/4, of women fall into the MBTI personality type of xSFJ, while inversely for men it is xSTJ.

And beyond that there are tendencies to particular types for both sexes. (And exceptions to every rule.)

>Sorry, I recognize gender dysphoria but I don't buy the "female mind" meme.
Objectively there isn't a "female mind" so how could anyone possess one.

Essentialism brings light to the very real fact that borders between objects are non-obvious, it's because of your the perception of reality your brain generates that we feel the need as humans to differentiate the can of coke on your desk from the desk itself at all. What objectively defines the difference between these two "Objects", they are both made up of atoms, etc. and when looking at the knife edge of physics and the quantum world you see that things like distance are subjective as well (our universe is actually a sort of a hologram). Even the discretion between elementary particles is non-obvious and it takes a mind that can see through these products of human intuition to push the field forward at this point.

I doubt the average human let alone a tranny possesses the multi-disciplinary scientific or epistomological knowledge to truly process this all.

I tend to take the "female mind" meme on good faith just like "I feel like a woman". It's a fair enough approximation.

>>8632624
Gender dysphoria is not a delusion.
In anorexia (for example), the delusion is that the person sees their body as fat when it's not and that causes distress.
With gender dysphoria, the distress is caused by gendered features that are perceived entirely correctly.
Regardless of whether it's psychological or physiological, gender dysphoria is not the result of a delusion.

>>8632826
A chair is an object people sit on (decorative chairs are models of chairs, not actual chairs), one person at a time (multiple is a bench or sofa), with a back (no back is a stool).

Please critique.

Also more please about how this applies to transness and about your alternate view of transness.

>>8634403
Why are xNxx's so rare?

>>8634651
A lot of trannies here seem to be xNxx actually. That was what a recent thread indicated. Also, what did the N mean?

File: number-two.jpg (28KB, 550x550px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 550x550px

>>8634647
People sit on tables, couches, benches, rocks, and so forth; there are situations in which multiple people sit on a chair (for example, one person sitting on another person's lap), and it's not at all clear if pic related has a back.
The most compelling argument I've heard for why we regard "artifacts" (things created by humans) as we do is by trying to judge the intent of the creator. So your one person at a time is, rather, that it was designed with one sitter in mind, but that's a far different assessment of chairness. Hence pic related is a chair because we believe that's what it was made for, but how we come to that belief is far more complicated.
As for transness, much like a chair isn't defined by its properties, gender isn't defined by properties (so-called sexual characteristics) but by a similar ethereal "whatness." We don't have the same out as we do with chairs (intent of designer), so this is a basically religious position, that we're arguing about souls.
I personally believe basically two things: First, boy monkeys like playing with cars and girl monkeys like playing with dolls, so sexual dimorphism clearly runs deep. There has to be a mechanical (bodily) explanation for the "boys play with cars, girls play with dolls" thing, so it's little surprise that can go awry in potentially strange ways. (This is also why I don't believe for a second there's a women-in-tech crisis.) Second, most of the talk about gender concerns wanting to be regarded in a certain way, because much of our identity comes from our interactions with others, and trans people become dissonant about the way they regard themselves versus the way others regard them. This leads to bizarre theories about self and society, and to a fair bit of social bludgeoning and "gender pantomime." In particular for this thread, since most people ARE Platonists about object-identity, this basically requires one to take gender on Platonic terms.

>>8634911
>A lot of trannies here seem to be xNxx actually.
4chan is predominantly N types, aside from like /b/ or /poll/ and the like probably.
To generalize N types are intellectually curios. They like hypothetical's and exploring ideas just for the sake of doing it, whereas sensors don't like it unless it has a practical application in their own sphere of reality. So everyone on here is more likely to be N.

>Also, what did the N mean?
This is a huge simplification, but intuition is intellectual curiosity, they tend to like hypotheticals and entertaining ideas just for the sake of doing it. Whereas sensors are interested in things that practical and applicable in their own sphere of reality.
One isn't smarter than the other, both can do either, they just have different preferences.

>>8634651
>Why are xNxx's so rare?
I would assume you would need to study evolutionary psycology/biology to theorize why.

They are only like 30% of the population though, and it's pretty obvious anecdotally. N's tend to be more creative, and are often nerds, there are just fewer of those people.

Who is this semen demon?
Is for a work

>>8635182
I like your explanations, thank you. I'm INTJ and I really identify with descriptions of INTJs but I don't really know the MBTI types besides that. Can you explain the other letters like you did for N?

File: chair.jpg (12KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 400x400px

>>8634647
Also, keep in mind that any property theory of objects has to deal with the other half of the story: there are objects that people sit on one at a time with a back that are not chairs. Besides pic related, you have to deal with ambiguous cases, like car seats, racing game arcade cabinets, jump seats in airplanes, and so on. Then the problem for a property theory of objects is that you get so caught up in minutiae about "this belongs to A, this doesn't belong to A, this looks like A but really belongs to B so I need to amend A to exclude it" that your system of properties becomes a history of all the exceptional cases that have occurred to you and the exceptional properties you've added to deal with them.
Which is exactly why people look for other ways of talking about objects; it's not like Plato wrote about caves because he was into spelunking.

File: 6358360012713123181189749044_IMG_8336.png (80KB, 1013x895px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 1013x895px

>>8635226
MBTI is useful, but it's best to look at Jungian Cognitive Functions which it is based on. Tests are meaningless, you'll only benefit from personality models if you understand them well enough to diagnose yourself.

IDK if I could really give a simple answer to what E/I, T/F, or J/P are, they are a lot more complicated that they sound like they are.

>>8631235
Gender vs Sex is a better model than a simple “male/female” binary, since it accounts for the existence of trans people, but it is still problematic:

(1) It begs the question of Cartesian Duality—the spiritual notion that minds (which are said to have genders) and bodies (which are said to have sexes) are separate—while a more rigorous model might hold the “mind” to be a physiological process of the body.

(2) While it allows for minds and bodies to have non-matching sex/gender, it doesn’t interrogate the assumption that sex is a binary phenomenon with two discrete manifestations, and therefore has no means to account for the identities and experiences of intersex people, whose bodies sit at a midpoint on a continuum.

(3) Because of (2) it fails to reveal the fact virilization and feminization are also processes, which:
• continue throughout gestation, puberty, and adulthood
• can be halted and reversed
• can be undergone simultaneously or not at all
Considering this, it becomes clear that everyone’s body sits not within two discrete categories of “male” or “female” and not even at a midpoint on a continuum between “male” and “female”, but at a point in a two-dimensional field defined by varying degrees of virilization and feminization on each axis.

(4) Moreover, that because virilization and feminization may proceed variously across different tissues, organs, and body parts, this two dimensional field has a different value for every cell in your body.

(5) Because of (2) it fails to take into account that the process of chopping up the perceptual space of gender into two discrete categories draws an inevitable and arbitrary line across the continuum of human experience whose location can vary across cultures, and therefore provides no principled understanding of third-gender categories such as fa’afafine, hijra, mukhannathun, kathoey, sworn virgins, two-spirits, sekhet, kurgarra, and so forth.

File: such a boy wow.png (437KB, 620x669px) Image search: [Google]

437KB, 620x669px

>>8631696
It's a retarded fakeboi who goes by blewballoons on deviantART. Cis girl who pretended to be a gheyboi crossdresser xD for attention before girls like her discovered the trans movement.

>>8631761
The brain has learning tendencies not innate structure. Take the case of dogs who don't have social pressure relevant to body perception.
Dogs show signs of phantom limb pain when amputation occurs as an adult. They do not show signs of phantom limb pain when they are born missing a limb. Likewise, 80% of childhood amputees in humans experience phantom limb, but only 20% of congenital amputees. That 20% figure is likely explainable by social pressure or neural feedback that occurred prior to the limb failing to fully develop.

Your brain begins to represent a limb as it learns to use that limb. There isn't an innate part of the brain that represents the left foot, there must be a feedback loop with the foot and the brain for that representation to build.

There ARE parts of the brain that result in feelings of bodily detachment when they are malformed or damaged. This is thought to underlie anorexia but suspiciously neuroscientists choose not to explain gender dysphoria as a special socially constructed case of more generalized body dysmorphia.

>>8635532
Then how is gender dysphoria constructed? What makes someone trans?

>>8632826
Plato simply observed that the human mind has the tendency to externals to an abstract identity, and that these abstracts tend to follow a set pattern. This goes on all throughout society every day without a hint of thought by those who partake in it. Consider the wine taster. When he speaks of "notes of apple, plum, bergamot, and apricot" he is not claiming the winery threw apples into the grape mash, nor is he claiming that he has the power to individually extract or determine esters by the receptors on his tongue. He can simply go by what his senses tell him - and somewhere along that process, that sensory information must be reduced to an abstract in order to be vocalized. Everyone who tastes wine professionally will agree on certain flavors from certain compounds from certain wines in certain regions of the world but they can never delineate how these compounds produce the mouthfeel of a perfect wine. These people do not take their wines to the lab to be analyzed, they simply trust that there is a concrete world of compounds with very long and hard to pronounce names that produce flavors that tickle their tongue's delight.

Without even realizing it, they have all surrendered to Plato. As you stated, it's "pretty much what everyone believes" about the identity of objects, and thus it shapes human societies despite the validity or lack thereof of true Platonism. Whether or not it is Plato's world, I cannot say, but it certainly is Plato's ecumene.

>>8635384
I'm sympathetic to your point but have some issues with it. While there is significant variance in any individual brain region if you look at men and women in the aggregate you will see very clear patterns overall. Correlations, not deterministic relations. A few areas are thought to be dimorphic outright. There is no clear individual progression from male to female because of the reasons you mentioned but as someone is exposed to more sex hormones in the womb the centers of the bell curves for all of these different qualities shift. In a very abstract way this can be thought to be the gender spectrum, though it does not map directly in the way people think it does.