The essence of the avocado vs. artichoke debate lies in the dynamic of opposing ideas of essentialism and proteanism in philosophy. According to the avocado view of philosophy, humans have a core that defines them, similar to the fruit. Even when the outer layer of skin and insides are removed from it, the seed can be planted again, giving life to the same fruit. On the contrary, artichoke has layers with nothing inside. If it is pealed, nothing will be left. Resembling artichoke, nothing in human nature remains constant in this view. While essentialism reinforces the idea of unchanging human nature, proteanism supports the view that external influences can transform a person.
Western vs. Eastern philosophy
Moreover, these views reflect the contrasting essence of Western and Eastern philosophical traditions. While Western philosophy is relatively consistent and rooted in the writings of Plato and Aristotle, its Eastern counterpart distinguishes itself by its diversity. Ames (2022) writes, “the fundamental distinctions between a Greek substance ontology grounded in the self-sufficiency of “being” (ousia) and a classical Chinese cosmology… “becoming” …” (p. 61). In other words, Chinese culture and philosophy focus on extrinsic circumstances and how they affect humans; meanwhile, Western tradition gravitates toward inward individualistic exploration of the human condition.
Feminist view of the debate
Furthermore, the concept and the interpretation of Plato and Aristotle bear some problematic implications for the modern-day feminist movement. This perspective aligns with the outdated theories that portray men as inherently rational and women – as emotional, incapable of reasoning, and in need of domination. Combined with the concept of avocado, these thoughts dismiss any possibility of change and influence of external factors, including upbringing and socialization. Therefore, feminist thinkers emphasize this aspect of the debate more, demanding the scrutiny of the essentialism foundations.
Conclusion
The avocado vs. artichoke debate addresses the age-old question of whether people can change and the implications of this fact. Both views present quite polarizing extremes and have outdated pre-conceived notions, as in the case of essentialism. As psychology and neurology develop more in recent years, it becomes clearer that the answer to the debate can lie somewhere in the middle, combining both ideas and averaging out their more controversial sides.
References
Ames, R. T. (2022). Unloading the Essentialism Charge: Some Methodological Reflections in Doing Philosophy of Culture. Comparative Philosophy and Method: Contemporary Practices and Future Possibilities, 55.