380. More Female Philosophers

This is a topic which is pretty near and dear to my heart. I wouldn’t be so bold to call myself a female philosopher, but I’m certainly in the “zone” so to speak. It’s a very strong interest of mine, and well… I am a female.

Like most discussions, this idea starts with the fact that there are not many female philosophers, at least ones in the mainstream that we talk about often. In terms of the “birth” of philosophy, they were primarily all male. Now don’t get me wrong, metaphysics is certainly a topic of conversation, which is definitely divine feminine oriented. But we must admit that philosophy was created through the divine masculine or a male’s perspective/lens. While we may consider that it’s their experience that speaks for all of humanity, we must consider that they are not the ones expanding the collective, giving birth, and in the same way, raising life. How on earth could men speak on philosophy when their experience on earth is rooted in the here and the now, and would theoretically not be impacted by what comes before or after life? 

We’ve somehow separated spirituality/religion and philosophy, which I completely understand why. But how could philosophy not be impacted wit what does or doesn’t happen after death? Wouldn’t this hypothetically inform the majority of our understandings and values? I would argue, yes.

Let’s take a step back and expand upon the idea of physical-based philosophy. Divine masculine perspective is primarily rooted in physical/the matrix. Which means that it’s not as fluent with abstract arts such as communication, creativity, spirituality, mental state and emotions.  It’s primarily concerned with what currently/already exists, but perhaps less of the past, the future, and what exists beyond this dimension. It’s not that it cannot breach these topics, it’s just that the base perspective is not as closely aligned to it. Meaning that divine masculine philosophy is geared towards the physical, in general. So it can unintentionally lapse in the consciousness realm.

Arguably, as we were “new” humans learning about our own beliefs, our values, morals, etc. Physical philosophy was particularly important. We were trying to figure out the world around us. But now we must ask ourselves… is divine masculine philosophy relevant anymore?

I do want to say that a large part of this conversation is the fact that we are evolving rapidly as a collective. How will we able to keep up with future, future demands and needs if we’re only deducing that’s currently going on, or what’s already happened? We already know what we know.

I do find that the crux of the dichotomy between religion and philosophy is the fact that we’ve used religion as a negative force in the past. Religion is the smallest sample size of what spirituality truly is. Because it’s a belief system, and there’s little to no connection to one’s self. We make up that difference with our own sense of spirituality. I repeat… religion is not spirituality. It’s a guide. We make up the difference.

Despite not wanting to blend philosophy and religion, I do think we need to intersect in spirituality, or else we’re going to lose both sides. We must find more harmonious alignment with the topics, as all of these are extremely relevant in our ways of thinking and being. Particularly when it comes to our life purpose.

I do feel that ideology war is a thing, and although it can be more granular, on a larger scale, I find that its root is based in repression fo divine feminine ideology. If we were more accepting and aligned to divine feminine ideology, we would have a much more harmonious and acceptance-based existence with religion and spirituality.

This is why of course… I’m calling for more female or divine feminine-centric philosophers.