Below is an analysis of use of logic in a book by Elizabeth and Stuart Ewen. The analysis will concentrate on the first chapter of the book which is titled 'Male and Female Created He Them.' In this chapter, Elizabeth and Ewen introduce the roots of gender inequality by exposing historical facts that have carried their underlying fallacious messages into today's society.
In order to bring logic to their literature, 'inequality between men and women and its origin,' Elizabeth and Ewen make use of facts. For instance, in the beginning of the chapter, the authors use a story of Harvard president who claimed the inequality of men/women had factual roots based in neuroscience, rather than sociology. The notion that inequality between men and women had factual roots based in neuroscience is a fact. For something to be fact, it has the capacity to be proven through the available information. The history of neuroscience is known to have been dominated by male character and many neuroscience theories are associated with male characters as being the persons behind their invention. This can be proved through newspapers, interviews and exact quotes of opponents. However, the authors commit ad hominem fallacy when they refer to Summers's reputation as high-handed arrogance and they insinuate that it would cost him his job. This is fallacy as the argument diverts from his point about inequality to matters relating to his character (Melnemy, p.115).
Use of the religious doctrines to explain the roots of gender inequality is yet another fact used by the authors. Religious doctrines in the Judeo-Christian faith suggest the inequality of man and women was sacred. This is a fact and can be proved from the historical manuscripts and accounts of events at the time of Roman Empire. This can also be proven from the Bible. The authors make several quotes from the Bible to show that inequality between men and women is a real fact with its which can be proven. Elizabeth and Ewen literature on inequality between men and women is based on scientific basis of inequality as facts. The authors refer to a 1754 discourse by Jean Jacques Rousseau which maintains that inequality between men and women has its origin from flawed political institutions in the history. Evidence for Jean Jacques's claim has been provided by the authors through numerous examples of Jacques's work such as 'The social contract' of 1762 which states that men and women have inherently different dispositions, and that woman was made to please man. Also in 'Emile' of 1762 whereby Jacques maintain that since men and women are dissimilar, then they should not have the same education. This factual information can be proven from Jacques's book.
Based on Jacques's work, the authors make use of argument condition A to B. Elizabeth and Ewen state that, "in a world where 'great men' would increasingly use elaborate systems of scientific categorization to underwrite the verifiable 'truth' of inequality, woman was defined as inherently unfit to render such judgments" (p. 13, line 5). In this sentence, the authors can be seen to use conditional argument as a means of being logical. Conditional argument is based on 'if-then' argument. This is based on the notion that, if a certain condition which has been set in mind happens or is met, then certain consequence(s) will follow. In this sentence, the condition that if men increasingly use elaborate systems of scientific categorization to underwrite the verifiable truth of inequality, then, woman is defined inherently unfit to render such judgment. The first part of the sentence can be seen as condition A, while the other part is condition B. Since A happens, then B is. Use of conditional argument forms a good basis of making a conclusion in logic manner. That is, if the premise is true (the condition), then the consequence (which forms the basis for conclusion) of the premise is true.
Elizabeth and Ewen further make their work logic by basing their literature on inequality between men and women on Bathsua Makin (1694) proposal to have an academy for women. In the proposal, Makin offered a curriculum that was conventionally seen to be appropriate for women. This included dancing, singing as well as history, philosophy, Greek, Latin among others. This can be proved from the text by Bathsua Makin. The authors also seek logic of their work from 1694 Mary Astell's 'A serious Proposal to the Ladies for the Advancement of their true and Great Interest.' Astell challenges her readers (women) why they are contented being in the world just like tulips in a garden which make a very good show yet they are good for nothing. Astell Also advocate establishment of secular convents where women might gain serious knowledge. Facts about his can be proven from reading the text by Mary Astell. More logic in Elizabeth and Ewen's points of argument is based on the facts provided in Daniel Defoe's text 'The Education of Women.' Daniel gives a diatribe against the enforced ignorance of women. He believed highly educated women would be far more felicitous companions for men than the women of folly and impertinence. Facts about his can be proven from Daniel Defoe's book. Here, another ad hominem fallacy has bee committed by the authors when they refer to Defoe as a self-proclaimed advocate for women in the government of which he was not. Mary Wollstonecraft's 'A Vindication of the rights of women' also makes part of logic typecasting in Elizabeth's and Ewen's work. Wollstonecraft refutes Rousseau's ideas by arguing that any education that fostered submissiveness was a direct conflict with Rousseau's general principles regarding freedom (Elizabeth and Ewen, p.14).
In page 15, Elizabeth and Ewen make use of conditional argument yet again. In the sentence, "as such radical challenges to conventions that had long shaped relations between the sexes accelerated in the second half of the nineteenth century, the governing thought continued to assert that men and women were fundamentally dissimilar and that civilization required the rule of men" (Elizabeth and Ewen, p.15) there is an antecedent and a consequent. The first part makes the antecedent (condition A) while the second part, separated by a comma, makes the consequent. Since the radical challenges to conventions that had long shaped relations between sexes accelerated in the second half of 19th century, then due to civilization, men were required to rule. Occurrence of the consequent is due to prior happening of the condition (antecedent). This is a demonstration of logical typecasting in the text.
Further developments in the text can be seen in page 17 where use of facts has continued to be used by the authors. Facts used include Freidrich Engels's 'Origin of Family, Private Property and the State' 1884. Engels maintains that the disparities of power between men and women were not based on their inherent natures but were the result of social and historical circumstances, rooted in antiquity. This can be proven by reading the piece of writing by Engels. Engels explains how men forcibly inhibited the social and sexual lives of their wives as an attempt to guarantee that their offspring indeed became theirs. Victoria Woodhull's publication is yet another basis of fact used by the authors. Woodhull sees monogamy as an institution that systematically oppresses women. He condemns monogamy and refers to monogamous marriage as nothing more than legalized prostitution (Elizabeth and Ewen, p.19). Charlotte Parkins Gilman's book has also been utilized by the authors to form facts for the text. Gilman observes that modern industrialization can emancipate women from their dependence on men for survival. Use of fact can also be seen in page 18 (line 16) were the authors uses a fact from Calverton and Schmalhausen's 'Sex in Civilization.' The authors quote that "...the rise of industrial production and larger-scale capitalist agriculture were destabilizing the relationship between the family and society at large." This is a fact which can be proven from reading the text (Elizabeth and Ewen, p.18).
Conditional argument has also been used in page 18 where the authors state that as the number of women employed in factories continued to increase, and as middle-women were openly questioning about their status in the home, there arose a need to determine the natural roles of men and of women in middle-class systems of belief (Elizabeth and Ewen, p.18). The condition that the number of working women continued to increase, and the condition that middle-class women started questioning about their positions in the homes, leads to the consequence that natural roles of men and women needed to be determined in the middle class system of beliefs. Due to the happening of the two conditions, then the consequence was. This presents condition A to B argument as part of logical typecasting.
In the text, Elizabeth and Ewen have utilized various aspects of logic. In a text, use of facts and conditional argument makes the evidence that logical typecasting has been used in the text. Elizabeth and Ewen employ facts and conditional argument a lot in their text. Use of facts has been well utilized in the text without much diversion into value statements. According to Melnemy's considerations, a text can be said to be more logical when fact statements are used instead of value statements (Melnemy, p.72). A lot of factual information has been used by the authors in the text. However, a part from ad hominem fallacies (as mentioned earlier), democratic fallacies have also been committed by the author.
For instance, by referring to the story of Harvard president about his claim of root base of inequality of men and women as being in neuroscience other than sociology is democratic fallacy. Just because the Harvard president claimed so, it does not provide sufficient evidence to allow us believe in his claim. In referring to religious doctrines, democratic fallacy has also been committed. Just because many religious doctrines including the Bible reveals that inequality between man and woman is sacred, it does not provide us with enough evidence to conclude that inequality between man and woman is sacred. It can therefore be concluded that the authors failed to be logical when they provided these facts as a basis of support for their literature.
General use of condition argument has been properly used by the authors and it has formed a good basis of making conclusions based on happening of certain conditions (Melnemy, p.63).