Well, the difference could simply be that you are talking about the most positive reading of some original concepts whilst others are talking about the reality of its praxis.
-
-
I suspect there are other reasonable peopke who disagree with you.
-
Yes, but if they disagree with me on the issues & values I hold, I can't coherently consider them reasonable on those issues & values. If I did, I'd change my own to them & we'd no longer be in disagreement. I could find them reasonable more broadly if we disagree on one thing.
-
We disagree. I take it we are able to do so because of reasonableness and not despite it.
-
I have not heard any arguments from you for intersectionality. I have no idea what your reasoning abilities are like. So far, I only know that you are polite and have not said anything unreasonable.
-
I agree with Crenshaw's use of the term. I think it misleading to paint it as an ideology invading humanities departments. I think social justice and identity politics ought not be used as derisive descriptions--and that being unreasonable and irrational are different things.
-
Finally (I'm going to bed) the fact that some are now attempting to dismiss concern over climate change as rooted in "social justice identity politics" illustrates one additional reason I cringe every time I hear hasty generalizations being made about such concepts. Goodnight.
-
Yes, but we've never disagreed about the problem of making hasty generalizations about concepts.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
But if you know of anyone who uses intersectionality & associated concepts of diversity, inclusion etc in a reasonable & rigorous way which includes the value of shared humanity & individuality and viewpoint diversity, please do highlight them to me.
-
Your question above is why I referred you to the Oxford handbook.
-
Which essay does this?
-
I would genuinely love to find an intersectional or critical race theorist who takes a humanistic approach, supports individuality and sees diversity & inclusion in terms of viewpoints rather than immutable characteristics. Generally, they don't & explain why very explicitly.
-
See, for example, Crenshaw, Laude, hooks, Coates, Hill, Wolf, Bailey, Medina, DiAngelo, Dotson, Applebaum, Mills, Boler, Davies, McIntyre, Ahmed & Sullivan, who all take the standpoint epistemology & identity politics approach which I am disagreeing with.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.