CRT, unfalsifiable claims, and Kafka-traps

[Subduction Zone]

So, 37 posts in...

Did any of my critics read the article I linked to in the OP?

I read most of it. The problem is that the author found one source that may not reflect the consensus on CRT. It appears to be a very biased source. That is the sort of tactic that various science deniers use. They try to make it personal. Finding one authority that supposedly represents all of them. Why didn't you follow through with @Orbit's suggestions and check the primary literature for yourself?

 

[icehorse]

Citation needed

Wait, what? You're unable to use a search engine?

 

[icehorse]

I read most of it. The problem is that the author found one source that may not reflect the consensus on CRT. It appears to be a very biased source. That is the sort of tactic that various science deniers use. They try to make it personal. Finding one authority that supposedly represents all of them. Why didn't you follow through with @Orbit's suggestions and check the primary literature for yourself?

ahhh, no - multiple sources are discussed in the article...

As for the "primary literature", none of my worthy opponents have given me a source they would find to their liking

 

[Shadow Wolf]

ahhh, no - multiple sources are discussed in the article...

As for the "primary literature", none of my worthy opponents have given me a source they would find to their liking

Let me quote you on this:

Wait, what? You're unable to use a search engine?

 

[Subduction Zone]

ahhh, no - multiple sources are discussed in the article...

As for the "primary literature", none of my worthy opponents have given me a source they would find to their liking

Two sources. I appear that you could all that "multiple". but the term is usually applied when one has too many sources to be sure of immediately.

You could always ask @Orbit politely for some representative articles.

 

[icehorse]

CRT doesn't actually claim that. This has been explained to you and yet again here you are with a thread repeating this fantasy.

DiAngelo claims that, and she has a HUGE audience.

And BTW, I don't recall me ever quoting this DiAngelo bit. I have discussed CRT before however.

So I'll ask you as I've asked the others: You said "CRT doesn't actually claim that". So what is your source?

I have tried to pin down specific curriculum and I have failed. It appears that those who teach CRT like to keep their lessons vague?

 

[icehorse]

Let me quote you on this:

There is a difference! They claim to know acceptable sources. Great, point me to them.

That's very different than do a search for a simple factual claim, correct?

 

[icehorse]

Two sources. I appear that you could all that "multiple". but the term is usually applied when one has too many sources to be sure of immediately.

You could always ask @Orbit politely for some representative articles.

I just skimmed thru the article again. TEN different sources were cited in one way or another. So perhaps we're misunderstanding some of each other's terminology?

As for politeness, go back thru the thread and double check who started with the personal crap.

In fact, I went out of my way to do a steelman, the courtesy was not returned.

 

[Revoltingest]

DiAngelo claims that, and she has a HUGE audience.

And BTW, I don't recall me ever quoting this DiAngelo bit. I have discussed CRT before however.

So I'll ask you as I've asked the others: You said "CRT doesn't actually claim that". So what is your source?

I have tried to pin down specific curriculum and I have failed. It appears that those who teach CRT like to keep their lessons vague?

In every cromulent exposition of CRT that I
recall reading, not one said that every white
is racist. Have any links.

Excuse my not wading thru all prior posts
to see if you've done this already.

 

[icehorse]

In every cromulent exposition of CRT that I
recall reading, not one said that every white
is racist. Have any links.

Excuse my not wading thru all prior posts
to see if you've done this already.

Robin DiAngelo said this in her influential book, it's early in the article linked to in the OP.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I just skimmed thru the article again. TEN different sources were cited in one way or another. So perhaps we're misunderstanding some of each other's terminology?

As for politeness, go back thru the thread and double check who started with the personal crap.

In fact, I went out of my way to do a steelman, the courtesy was not returned.

I only saw two. But you may be right. Did all ten agree with your claim that CRT teaches "all white people are racists"? And teaching that all people are racists, we do all have some inborn tribalism, is not the same at all as saying "all white people are racists".

 

[Revoltingest]

Robin DiAngelo said this in her influential book, it's early in the article linked to in the OP.

Is the claim actually made in any curriculum?
After all, educators have the right to ignore
racist rants rather than incorporate them.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

DiAngelo claims that, and she has a HUGE audience.

So does Ken Ham, as did Billy Graham and Pat Robbertson.

I have tried to pin down specific curriculum and I have failed.

Probably because it doesn't teach that. This has been explained to you by those in a better position than me.

 

[icehorse]

Probably because it doesn't teach that. This has been explained to you by those in a better position than me.

I will continue to assume good faith discussion here, difficult as that may be...

I have tried to track down ANY specific CRT curriculum - not going in with any preconceived notions about what I'm looking for, just trying to get a look at what ideas are being taught.

And no, this has in fact NOT been explained to me. Posters have done virtue signal, arm waving, but no specific, falsifiable claims have been forthcoming, sigh.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I will continue to assume good faith discussion here, difficult as that may be...

I have tried to track down ANY specific CRT curriculum - not going in with any preconceived notions about what I'm looking for, just trying to get a look at what ideas are being taught.

And no, this has in fact NOT been explained to me. Posters have done virtue signal, arm waving, but no specific, falsifiable claims have been forthcoming, sigh.

Here's an over view of the general idea, complete with sources.

Critical race theory - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

That was was maybe five seconds of searching.

 

[Yerda]

You do you think represents best what CRT means?

From wiki:

CRT, a framework of analysis grounded in critical theory,[19] originated in the mid-1970s in the writings of several American legal scholars, including Derrick Bell, Alan Freeman, Kimberlé Crenshaw, Richard Delgado, Cheryl Harris, Charles R. Lawrence III, Mari Matsuda, and Patricia J. Williams.

These sound like good places to start.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Robin DiAngelo said this in her influential book, it's early in the article linked to in the OP.

Citation needed, because the article in the OP quotes no such thing. It just asserts it.

Have you read the DiAngelo's book? Have the considered that there might be a little bit more complexity and nuance to a position when it is expounded upon in an entire book versus being summed up in an (what is fairly obviously a fairly bad faith) article?

Are you willing to acknowledge that, maybe, you don't know enough about this subject? Are you willing to actually listen to other people explain to you and acknowledge that? Because I've been through this with you before, and you seem very reluctant to admit when you very obviously have been misinformed about something.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Ok, so you're all telling me that DiAngelo is NOT a leading authority on CRT? (seems a tall claim, but let's go with that for now)

So then, what IS the definitive work on CRT?

==

As far as "influential" goes: I think it's useful to consider how an idea influences the world, no? So "perhaps" DiAngelo has CRT all wrong. Again, that seems an extraordinary claim...

But! She's super influential in the world. So you guys are quick to explain to me how academia works (phew, I was so confused), but frankly, who cares?

What's important is what influences the population. So if DiAngelo's got it wrong, you academic types have totally failed to correct her.

It's interesting that you're pointing fingers everywhere else and taking no responsibility

Do you know, there's a very long entry on CRT in Wikipedia, and it is replete with citations -- 186 of them, all told -- along with more than 50 reference books and articles listed. And DiAngelo is mentioned -- well, not at all, actually.

Why do you think that might be, if she is so "influential" on the subject?

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

From wiki:

CRT, a framework of analysis grounded in critical theory,[19] originated in the mid-1970s in the writings of several American legal scholars, including Derrick Bell, Alan Freeman, Kimberlé Crenshaw, Richard Delgado, Cheryl Harris, Charles R. Lawrence III, Mari Matsuda, and Patricia J. Williams.

These sound like good places to start.

So my previous post -- each of those people (except Lawrence) is cited in the Wikipedia article on the subject. Robin DiAngelo is not.

 

[Twilight Hue]

Do you know, there's a very long entry on CRT in Wikipedia, and it is replete with citations -- 186 of them, all told -- along with more than 50 reference books and articles listed. And DiAngelo is mentioned -- well, not at all, actually.

Why do you think that might be, if she is so "influential" on the subject?

Wiki last edited by Richard-of-Earth.

Creative.