Someone made an interesting comment in class yesterday. While exploring the question of why in the United States women enjoy a higher status and more opportunities relative to most other cultures throughout time, one person observed that in the past women were needed to produce as many children as they could because of poor health conditions that led to a high infant and child mortality. This leads me to ask...
Is penicillin the cause of the Equal Rights Amendment? In other words, should we credit medical advancement as a cause of any of our advancements in social equality? If so, what kind of cause is it? Is it a necessary cause, meaning the social change could not happen without it? Is it a sufficient cause, meaning that with it social change must happen? Is it the direct cause, meaning there are no other intervening causes between medical advancment and social change?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
I'm no crazy feminist, but that certain comment about women offended me. To be honest, I thought it was completely ridiculous. Women should have ALWAYS had the same rights as men, just as blacks (or any race) should have ALWAYS had the same rights as whites. You can't justify that slavery was completely understandable/okay on the basis that slavery was "needed" or was just "the norm." No outside forces can justify the lack of women's rights. Social advancement comes with time, just as technological/medical advancement comes. All advancements open new ways of thinking--THIS is how all kinds of advancements influence each other. They are most often not direct causes. Medial advancement introduces more questioning/open mindedness that ignites social change.
Post a Comment