> But gender roles, for example, are very much observable and very much facts of life, yet gender is still considered a social construct.
By some. IMHO, there's a lot of effort going on in believing and making believe that gender roles are social constructs in spite of all the evidence (evidence, not necessarily proof) of the contrary.
Money is equivalent to red traffic lights. Its value is conventional, but the convention itself is objective. Ignore it at your peril (you'll be run over by somebody).
If all humans disappeared, the existence of both gender roles (be them social or innate or, as very probable, a mix of the two) and money would still be as objective as dinosaur fossils are today. Our faith in the preciousness of human life would be on the same level (a fossil). The actual preciousness of human life, as a universal fact in itself, never existed in the first place.
By some. IMHO, there's a lot of effort going on in believing and making believe that gender roles are social constructs in spite of all the evidence (evidence, not necessarily proof) of the contrary.
Money is equivalent to red traffic lights. Its value is conventional, but the convention itself is objective. Ignore it at your peril (you'll be run over by somebody).
If all humans disappeared, the existence of both gender roles (be them social or innate or, as very probable, a mix of the two) and money would still be as objective as dinosaur fossils are today. Our faith in the preciousness of human life would be on the same level (a fossil). The actual preciousness of human life, as a universal fact in itself, never existed in the first place.