Problem with the latter is people can feel resentment that someone has been hired / given an incentive just to make things more 'diverse'.
-
-
Replying to @christianjbdev @kpanyc
Then we talk to those folks about history, sociology, psychology, etc. We de-personalize but still account for structural inequalities.
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @joshua_r_eyler @kpanyc
Yeah, but a lot of this stuff is unscientific crap put about by activist scholars. Doesn't really hold up. (Sorry to be blunt.)
3 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @christianjbdev @kpanyc
Also, this is pretty disparaging to whole fields and whole groups of people. Are you suggesting that one cannot be both activist & scholar?
2 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
One can but its essential to make every effort to keep ideology out of scholarship & that isn't happening in certain fields right now.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
It's never happened, at any time, but that's the point of pushback through peer review & peer criticism. Not criticism from ignorance.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Um, I really hope you're not calling my friend ignorant.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
I think she's suggesting that you're talking about fields in which you don't have training.
4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Well, no-one has training in all of them!
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Right. Which makes it hard to categorically reject them. [I'm not saying that you yourself have done this.]
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
No need to categorically reject them. Can be very skeptical of ideas coming from them though!
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.