• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Who is emotionally stronger, women or men?

Are Women or Men Stronger Emotionally?

  • Women are stronger emotionally.

    Votes: 8 14.0%

  • Men are stronger emotionally.

    Votes: 14 24.6%

  • It really depends on the individual man or woman.

    Votes: 36 63.2%

  • WTF? Did Valentines Day Come Early? What's With the Touchy Feely?

    Votes: 3 5.3%

  • Other...

    Votes: 4 7.0%
  • Total voters
    57
Ntharotep said:
Why do the two have to be exclusive?
Emotion and logic are not always at odds.
Responses lacking emotion are not always the best course either. Actions without conscience (which can be based in emotion) can be monstrous and just as without logic as overemotional responses.
Click to expand...
1. You didn't answer my question yet want to ask me one.
Strange.
2. An emotional response usually means it is lacking rational thought.
3. How are then not at odds?
4. Calling something "monstrous" is based in emotion.
 
Cardinal said:
It's confusing to me as well. But as I've heard it, it contains two problems. The first is that by pulling the lever you are now a murderer because you've made a choice. That, however, is still over my head because inaction is still a choice. The second problem is that by pulling the lever you're officially playing God because you've made a life and death decision regarding the value of human life. And the problem with that is you've decided with zero prior information that multiple human lives are automatically worth more than one human life. And even if you did do the research on the accomplishments and potential of the five people versus the one, what gives you the authority to determine who has more value? Because one person has more shiny things than the other? Because one person would fare better on Jeopardy?

Still, though, the Trolley Problem has a degree of moral simplicity to it because of the relative physical aloofness of the Trolley conductor. Therefore, another dilemma was created to remove some of that ambiguity by removing the physical aloofness. In this example, you are a surgeon with five patients, all in need of crucial organs, and there are no transplant donors available to provide the organs. Then one day a perfect fit patient comes in for a standard checkup and you discover that his organs would be perfect for the five terminally ill patients. Do you take the healthy man's organs against his will to save five human lives?
Click to expand...

Just a note, inaction isn't necessarily due to a choice. Indecision is not a choice as it is the state of being unable to make a choice and it more often than not can cause an inaction.
 
Who is emotionally stronger, women or men?
Click to expand...

hard to make a determination without observing how a man reacts to growing a human being in his gut for nine months and then pushing it out of his asshole. once i see that, i'll vote in the poll.
 
PirateMk1 said:
The choice is morally equivalent and equally bad. It doesn't matter what choice you make, you are screwed in either test. One scenario you live though the other you don't. There is no "winning."
Click to expand...
iLOL The choices being spoken about were the ones in the Trolley Dilemma. Not the ones in the Trolley Dilemma vs that of the Kobayashi Maru.
 
Ntharotep said:
So. Typically speaking, men are seen as the colder and more rational under pressure of the sexes. Women are seen as making better emotional decisions as they are more compassionate and more able to empathize.
A few opposing thoughts on this:

Women's Brains are More Sensitive to Negative Emotions

Guess What? Men are More Emotionally Fragile Than Women

Is there a general rule for this or is it a crap shoot that depends on the wiring of each and every individual?

And...debate!
Or just discuss and philosophize. Either and/or...
Click to expand...

It really depends on the individual man or woman.

that's what gets my vote
 
Excon said:
iLOL The choices being spoken about were the ones in the Trolley Dilemma. Not the ones in the Trolley Dilemma vs that of the Kobayashi Maru.
Click to expand...

Same difference. The choices are equally bad morally speaking. It doesn't really matter what you pick. There is no right choice in EITHER test.
 
Kal'Stang said:
Just a note, inaction isn't necessarily due to a choice. Indecision is not a choice as it is the state of being unable to make a choice and it more often than not can cause an inaction.
Click to expand...

My understanding of the Trolley Problem is that the inaction is a choice not to pull the lever, rather than due to indecision.

PirateMk1 said:
That last one is easier than the trolley test. Far easier in fact, unless the guys dead, the people in need of organs are hosed they were preselected by nature for termination morally speaking, they are already dead its simply a matter of time. If the guy is alive and in good health it would be murder, plain and simple. Easy peasy. The trolley dilemma is a coin toss. You damned either way. Just wait to the last second to if circumstances change then make your choice. Besides I don't consider it to be a moral dilemma. Its simply a dilemma with no satisfactory answer and therefor whatever answer you pick is moral.
Click to expand...

Are you a fatalist then?
 
Excon said:
I see you do not want to acknowledge such, thus making your speculation on the ease of difficulty in guessing my choice, much more irrelevant than it already was.
Click to expand...

To acknowledge what, the choices in the Trolley Problem? That one choice is logically better than the other?
 
PirateMk1 said:
Same difference. The choices are equally bad morally speaking. It doesn't really matter what you pick. There is no right choice in EITHER test.
Click to expand...

I think the inherent crux of the Trolley Problem is in how you quantify human value and in what authority you have to make the determination between life and death. At least, that's how I see it.
 
Cardinal said:
It's confusing to me as well. But as I've heard it, it contains two problems. The first is that by pulling the lever you are now a murderer because you've made a choice. That, however, is still over my head because inaction is still a choice. The second problem is that by pulling the lever you're officially playing God because you've made a life and death decision regarding the value of human life. And the problem with that is you've decided with zero prior information that multiple human lives are automatically worth more than one human life. And even if you did do the research on the accomplishments and potential of the five people versus the one, what gives you the authority to determine who has more value? Because one person has more shiny things than the other? Because one person would fare better on Jeopardy?

Still, though, the Trolley Problem has a degree of moral simplicity to it because of the relative physical aloofness of the Trolley conductor. Therefore, another dilemma was created to remove some of that ambiguity by removing the physical aloofness. In this example, you are a surgeon with five patients, all in need of crucial organs, and there are no transplant donors available to provide the organs. Then one day a perfect fit patient comes in for a standard checkup and you discover that his organs would be perfect for the five terminally ill patients. Do you take the healthy man's organs against his will to save five human lives?
Click to expand...

hm....hadn't heard of the trolley test...I killed the one guy...it will haunt me until I die but I made the BEST decision under the circumstances

as to the surgeon, I view it very differently...I do not take the healthy organs he owns them, I have no right because there is no critical decision to make only a choice to be had
 
Ntharotep said:
Is this a logical response to the debate at hand? Could you expound on your answer?
Or is emotion in general a feminine/threatening thing for you?
Click to expand...

Nope. Just more bull-crap about men showing their feelings as the feminists/leftists are want to say. Anything to show men in a weaker light. Excuse me if I don't bawl like a baby.
 
Ntharotep said:
So. Typically speaking, men are seen as the colder and more rational under pressure of the sexes. Women are seen as making better emotional decisions as they are more compassionate and more able to empathize.
A few opposing thoughts on this:

Women's Brains are More Sensitive to Negative Emotions

Guess What? Men are More Emotionally Fragile Than Women

Is there a general rule for this or is it a crap shoot that depends on the wiring of each and every individual?

And...debate!
Or just discuss and philosophize. Either and/or...
Click to expand...

neither sex owns the emotional strength question

I would argue that it is the human being who is most balanced who would own the ability to stay sane under trying circumstances

thus strength is subjective

so is survival...especially when we examine concentration camp survival
 
Howler63 said:
Nope. Just more bull-crap about men showing their feelings as the feminists/leftists are want to say. Anything to show men in a weaker light. Excuse me if I don't bawl like a baby.
Click to expand...

no need to bawl like a baby but if you did it would not necessarily show you are weaker just like the INABILITY to bawl like a baby would not indicate you are weaker either

I do not cry easily my guy will cry before me when another human being shows incredible strength and kindness however when we come upon an accident and people are in crisis he directs the whole scene better than me

that's why we are great partners...you could reverse that scenario and neither of us would be lesser for it
 
I think men and women get emotional over different things. I think emotionally we are pretty equal. I think we get more emotional over things each considers to be more important. I think those differences is why we are so successful as a species. When I see a child climbing a tree I remember the fun and challenge of getting as high as I could get. I am emotional to the point of seeing him succeed in making to the top of the tree. If he is my son pride becomes the emotion. A mother on the other hand sees the danger and the agony of the real possibility of falling. She is the one that will have to take care of him and console him in the agony of the injury. She immediately wants him out of the tree so he doesn't get hurt where I am wanting to see him make it to the top. No I don't want him to fall and get hurt and the mother will also be proud to see him make it to the top. It is our priorities that are different. I think both are emotional.
 
PIPEWRENCH said:
I think men and women get emotional over different things. I think emotionally we are pretty equal. I think we get more emotional over things each considers to be more important. I think those differences is why we are so successful as a species. When I see a child climbing a tree I remember the fun and challenge of getting as high as I could get. I am emotional to the point of seeing him succeed in making to the top of the tree. If he is my son pride becomes the emotion. A mother on the other hand sees the danger and the agony of the real possibility of falling. She is the one that will have to take care of him and console him in the agony of the injury. She immediately wants him out of the tree so he doesn't get hurt where I am wanting to see him make it to the top. No I don't want him to fall and get hurt and the mother will also be proud to see him make it to the top. It is our priorities that are different. I think both are emotional.
Click to expand...

yeah, I like the way you laid that out....nice
 
Howler63 said:
More feminist kerfuffle.
Click to expand...

Meh - I think it's silly to constant go over 'men or women' but society seems to like to debate it endlessly - both men and women do.

Funny thing is, how people feel about it (good or bad) depends on what they think of 'being emotional'.
 
I think it depends. But in my house, my husband is far more emotional than I am.
 
Cardinal said:
I think the inherent crux of the Trolley Problem is in how you quantify human value and in what authority you have to make the determination between life and death. At least, that's how I see it.
Click to expand...

Well I see it differently. I am like Kirk, I would attempt to cheat as life is usually not a binary choice. That said in the trolley question, I see the authority for making said decision as mine regardless, that said people are going to die regardless the decision you make, therefor who you pick is moot. 5 or 1 makes no difference in the grand scheme of things, neither choice has any real inherent value over the other without more information.
 
Who is emotionally stronger, those always stirring up male vs female BS or those who try hard to ignore it? :D
 
One, two, three, four...

I declare a gender war.
 
Goshin said:
Who is emotionally stronger, those always stirring up male vs female BS or those who try hard to ignore it? :D
Click to expand...

And that my friend is the real question. :yt
 
Cardinal said:
It's confusing to me as well. But as I've heard it, it contains two problems. The first is that by pulling the lever you are now a murderer because you've made a choice. That, however, is still over my head because inaction is still a choice. The second problem is that by pulling the lever you're officially playing God because you've made a life and death decision regarding the value of human life. And the problem with that is you've decided with zero prior information that multiple human lives are automatically worth more than one human life. And even if you did do the research on the accomplishments and potential of the five people versus the one, what gives you the authority to determine who has more value? Because one person has more shiny things than the other? Because one person would fare better on Jeopardy?

Still, though, the Trolley Problem has a degree of moral simplicity to it because of the relative physical aloofness of the Trolley conductor. Therefore, another dilemma was created to remove some of that ambiguity by removing the physical aloofness. In this example, you are a surgeon with five patients, all in need of crucial organs, and there are no transplant donors available to provide the organs. Then one day a perfect fit patient comes in for a standard checkup and you discover that his organs would be perfect for the five terminally ill patients. Do you take the healthy man's organs against his will to save five human lives?
Click to expand...

I am glad you posted that variant. they are the same decision, but people come to drastically difference choices
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom