huh?
"the curricular inclusion of Indigenous perspectives is differentially problematic if we cannot also attend to the taken-for-granted & naturalized epistemological/ontological & axiological commitments/enactments of what we are including perspectives into." http://j.mp/2Vtpc3Y pic.twitter.com/QQBjOy3rqD
-
-
-
"We can't replace STEM with ideological bullshit until we succeed at discrediting science."
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Ah, yes. I prefer a balsamic vinigrette.
-
If you're publishing an article in a journal, shouldn't that be based on some sort of impassionate scientific analysis and tests, not a bunch of 'we must's, and 'taken-for-granted's? Do you just get to top-down declare an ideology, then fill in the blanks as you go?
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
And in layman’s terms?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Tell us something we don't know!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Nonsense, just like the "decolonization" of science I once watched a university take seriously.
-
Or this one article about "decolonizing" female physiology, since male doctors discovered parts of it and therefore have tissues, glands, and bits of female anatomy named after them... Really?
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Academic 1: "while I agree with the sentiment the logic is specious and easily disproven" Academic 2 : adds 432 syllables Academic 1 :pic.twitter.com/9LaCl5wX2x
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.