It comes down less to what people have actually studied in depth and more to what the dominant ideas of 'good' and 'bad' are in their culture or subculture. People who have never read anything still internalise concepts of 'sin' & 'blasphemy'.
-
-
Show this thread
-
Postmodernists were right to say that society is profoundly influenced by dominant discourses. They were wrong in their approach to remedying this.
Show this thread -
Because they believed that knowledge and truth were constructed by power and that people are situated within this by their position in society determined by their identity, the solution was to demote dominant ideas & elevate marginalised ones. Make everything equal.
Show this thread -
But this does necessarily require abandoning the idea that objective truth exists and that some moral value systems are better than others.
Show this thread -
It's quite possible to recognise that some truth claims & moral claims have been excluded from the conversation & remedy this but still evaluate both according to evidence, reason & consistently liberal humanist ethics.
Show this thread -
The problem is not that some ideas get marginalised but that they get marginalised for the wrong reason. Rejecting an idea because of the gender/race/sexuality of the person/people expressing it is a problem. Rejecting an idea because it has no evidence and/or is unethical is not
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I listen to NPR almost daily out of resigned habit. Yesterday they were talking about Islamophobia in the context of valentines day. Day before it was microaggresions. Before that gender identity. Intersectionality is underpinning the mainstream of our political consciousness.
-
Valentine's Day is an oppressive tool of the patriarchy designed to reaffirm societal views of men as virtuous aggressors and women as prey and I object strongly, the day after all the candies and chocolate are done rolling in.
-
Perhaps. I doubt very much neither Islam nor intersectional theory will provide worthwhile solutions for a non-compulsory holiday that many people don’t even practice & hardly rises to the level of pressing social issue.
-
Any reduction in the flow of free quality chocolate to me ranks as a pressing social issue.
-
I have it on good authority that Big Chocolate lobbyists are key to NPR's funding mechanism, thus program scheduling.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
The idea of concept creep is very real. It is now common parlance for someone to preface an opinion about a topic of identity conflict with "As an X, I believe Y" The idea of shared truth is undermined before an opinion is even expressed.
-
This is a tendency that I hate but unfortunately sometimes can't help but engage in. I don't want to say "As an X, blah blah blah", but nowadays it seems unavoidable if you want to preempt some of the tiring accusations. "As an POC", "As a woman", "As an immigrant", tiring...
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Sociology time! - Weber wrote extensively on how ideas can impact the structure of society Calvinism driving capitalism is the prime example of the influence of Christianity on secular life.
-
Interesting, that's a blind spot many atheists have- not fully grasping the influence of Christianity on modernity and parallels that occur in their belief systems that may have a similar lineage. FBOW, it's just an important part of the story people, esp "religion blamers, miss.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful (cough!), committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever does. Margaret Mead
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Exactly. Ideas have a way of “going viral.”
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
All axiomatic ideas are eventually either taken to their logical conclusion, or abandoned. This is why it's so important to get your axioms right. We can see this now with intersectionality eating its own.
-
IF: the moral value of your words and actions are determined completely by how oppressed you are deemed to be. THEN this creates a new, inverted social hierarchy. There's always someone more oppressed than you, and your opinions are rendered invalid if they disagree with you.
-
It is an axiom that leads to an oligarchy of the oppressed. That's not where we want to end up, but we can't avoid it without re-evaluating the axiom itself.
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.