Spelman’s critique:
Critique 1
Anthropomorphizing the metaphysical (the parts of the soul)
Aristotle anthropomorphizes the parts of the soul. He characterizes (describes) the parts of the soul in human terms as if they are persons in a political context. He describes the relationship between the rational and irrational part of the soul in political (human) terms: constitutional, royal rule.
He uses this anthropomorphic description in order to set up his conclusion that women are naturally subordinate to men.
Why is it wrong to describe the soul in human terms? Because they are distinct properties, they are different entities. Example: describing what a computer does in human terms as if it was sad. Sadness is a human quality (unique to us) and computers are things that do not have emotions. So when we impose human qualities onto something that is not human we make a mistake in understanding, reasoning. Some people say we shouldn’t describe animal actions in human terms either.
Critique 2
Inconsistency
Aristotle begins with the notion that nature intends for the rational to rule over the irrational in the soul. But when it comes to women’s souls, nature has different intentions, the rational element has no authority.
Critique 3
Begging the Question
Because Aristotle does not tell us why nature intends for the rational part of women’s souls have no authority over the irrational, why it is natural for women to be subordinate to men. Begging the question means that you are assuming what you are trying to prove.
The rational rules over the irrational because men rule over women.
He is explaining the parts of the soul by observing his culture (in order to make sense of relationships among parts of the soul, he has to rely on reference to and analogy to visible things).
Therefore, men by nature rule women.
In order to arrive at this conclusion, Aristotle assumes (implied premise) that the rational element of women’s souls is without authority (or the irrational part rules over the rational).
Unless he tells why he assumes this, he’s begging the question.
ON BOARD
In the soul the rational element rules over the irrational (how do you know?) because men rule over women (I see this in my society).
Assumption: So it must be the case that nature intends for the irrational to rule over the rational in women’s souls AND for the rational to rule over the irrational in men.
Therefore, men by nature rule women.