LINDA MARTÍN ALCOFF VS MARIA LUGONES
▸ WHERE THEY SHARPLY DISAGREED
The three dimensions on which Linda Martín Alcoff and Maria Lugones are farthest apart on Mull's 0–10 scale.
- Sovereign SelfΔ 1 / 10Linda Martín Alcoff: 5/10Maria Lugones: 6/10
somewhat (1/10): Maria Lugones treats the individual as the seat of moral authority; Linda Martín Alcoff embeds it elsewhere.
- Tragic VisionΔ 0 / 10Linda Martín Alcoff: 6/10Maria Lugones: 6/10
somewhat (0/10): Maria Lugones sees tragedy and limit as central; Linda Martín Alcoff doesn't make that the starting point.
- Vital AffirmationΔ 0 / 10Linda Martín Alcoff: 6/10Maria Lugones: 6/10
somewhat (0/10): Maria Lugones affirms life as it is more readily; Linda Martín Alcoff qualifies that affirmation.
▸ WHERE THEY OVERLAPPED
Where the gap is smallest — both with meaningful presence on the dimension (not "neither cared").
- Self as Illusiongap 0 / 10Linda Martín Alcoff: 4/10Maria Lugones: 4/10
Both keep self as illusion muted.
- Universalist Impulsegap 0 / 10Linda Martín Alcoff: 5/10Maria Lugones: 5/10
Both register moderate universalist impulse.
- Embodied Sensibilitygap 0 / 10Linda Martín Alcoff: 6/10Maria Lugones: 6/10
Both register moderate embodied sensibility.
▸ ALL 16 DIMENSIONS
The full vector comparison. Bars show their 0–10 scores side-by-side.
- Ascetic TendencyΔ 0
- Communal EmbeddednessΔ 0
- Embodied SensibilityΔ 0
- Mystical ReceptivityΔ 0
- Practical OrientationΔ 0
- Reverence for TraditionΔ 0
- Self as IllusionΔ 0
- Skeptical ReflexΔ 0
- Sovereign SelfΔ 1
- Theoretical DriveΔ 0
- Trust in ExperienceΔ 0
- Trust in ReasonΔ 0
- Tragic VisionΔ 0
- Universalist ImpulseΔ 0
- Vital AffirmationΔ 0
- Will to PowerΔ 0
Where do you sit between Linda Martín Alcoff and Maria Lugones?
- 01 · QUIZThe InheritorTake the quiz — see which of them you sit closer to on the map.CONTINUE ▶
- 02 · PROFILEMary CalkinsA third thinker who sits between them — useful for triangulating.CONTINUE ▶
- 03 · ARENAArgue Linda Martín AlcoffFace Linda Martín Alcoff in a 5-minute single-turn debate, judged on rigor.CONTINUE ▶