The Conversation
International · 2 hrs ago
✦ 75◉ Centre
A philosopher’s take on NZ’s bill to define who counts as a woman or man
75Quality
0Ratings
0Comments
AI Analysis
Quality 75/100
Partisan intensity 45/100
ObjectivePartisan
◉ Centre ✓ Fair headline
A philosopher uses the Pluto reclassification analogy to question New Zealand parliament's attempt to legally define the terms 'man' and 'woman', arguing that definitions are inherently contestable and political rather than purely factual matters.
A philosopher’s take on NZ’s bill to define who counts as a woman or man
stellalevi/Getty Images
In August 2006, at the general assembly of the International Astronomical Union in Prague, astronomers voted on a new definition of a planet, and Pluto was demoted.
Pluto didn’t change, only its definition.
Now New Zealand’s parliament is preparing to vote on the legal definition of “man” and “woman”. If scientists couldn’t end the controversy over what counts as a planet, why should we expect politicians to define who counts as a woman or man?
There is something strange
Discussion 0 comments
Sort:
?
No comments yet — be the first to start the discussion!