Is Woke a religion?

[Tomef]

The rise of Woke, cultural marxism, is it a religion?

I think it has some commonalities with religion, at the extreme end, e.g. ‘theory’ includes the idea that it isn’t subject to any one definition, as that would be an example of white male oppression, and some dubious beliefs, e.g. that scientific inquiry is a ‘white’ thing. It’s more of an ideology, though, as there are no supernatural elements as such.

 

[Argentbear]

You're not the first poster I've debated that's more or less both defending wokism and denying that it exists. And one thing I've learned is that providing citations is a waste of time. And we've seen proof of that in this thread.

woke exists, it just doesn't mean what you want it to.

and I haven't asked you for any references here. Elsewhere I have asked you to identify just what in WPATH's Standard of Care is so wrong/bad/awful and am still waiting on that.

 

[icehorse]

woke exists, it just doesn't mean what you want it to.

It strikes me that you want woke to mean what it used to mean (which was just fine), and that you're not open to seeing how it has devolved.

and I haven't asked you for any references here. Elsewhere I have asked you to identify just what in WPATH's Standard of Care is so wrong/bad/awful and am still waiting on that.

I gave you one quick, easy to find bad idea in WPATH's SOC. That bad idea is crucial to WPATH's entire argument, so it's up to you to find high quality evidence to support this foundational claim of WPATH's. And to review: six countries in Europe have now concluded that this claim of WPATH's has no good evidence to support it. So that's what your task is, to find high quality evidence that all of these top European professionals have not been able to find, after extensive meta studies.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

It strikes me that you want woke to mean what it used to mean (which was just fine), and that you're not open to seeing how it has devolved.


I gave you one quick, easy to find bad idea in WPATH's SOC. That bad idea is crucial to WPATH's entire argument, so it's up to you to find high quality evidence to support this foundational claim of WPATH's. And to review: six countries in Europe have now concluded that this claim of WPATH's has no good evidence to support it. So that's what your task is, to find high quality evidence that all of these top European professionals have not been able to find, after extensive meta studies.

So therefore everything else you claim is correct???

 

[Argentbear]

It strikes me that you want woke to mean what it used to mean (which was just fine), and that you're not open to seeing how it has devolved.


I gave you one quick, easy to find bad idea in WPATH's SOC. That bad idea is crucial to WPATH's entire argument, so it's up to you to find high quality evidence to support this foundational claim of WPATH's. And to review: six countries in Europe have now concluded that this claim of WPATH's has no good evidence to support it. So that's what your task is, to find high quality evidence that all of these top European professionals have not been able to find, after extensive meta studies.

actually you misquoted a line in the WPATH standard of care. You made numerous assertions about just how horrible the standard of care is but you can't actually point to anything in that guideline as being bad.

And as for your unrelated non answer one could ask the top professionals in the 38 countries European countries that are using the WPATH standard of care

 

[icehorse]

actually you misquoted a line in the WPATH standard of care. You made numerous assertions about just how horrible the standard of care is but you can't actually point to anything in that guideline as being bad.

No, I summarized from the SOC, I didn't quote.

And as we can all recall from our logic class, if a premise is false, then everything that depends on that premise is also false.

So, there are many other issues with the SOC, but all that's necessary is to find one crucial flaw, and much of the rest will be rendered bad.

If you want to pay me, I can find many other problems with the SOC, but since I post here as a volunteer, I think I've done all I need to do to support my claim in this debate.

And as for your unrelated non answer one could ask the top professionals in the 38 countries European countries that are using the WPATH standard of care

I think that would be quite interesting. But I doubt any of them could find high quality evidence to support the efficacy of the SOC. Remember that doctors frequently rely on protocols established by other doctors.

Next, I would guess that GD, which is mostly an affliction in affluent western countries, is probably far less common in the countries that have not abandoned the SOC.

 

[Viker]

It strikes me that you want woke to mean what it used to mean (which was just fine), and that you're not open to seeing how it has devolved.

Woke still means what it has always meant. You've allowed it to be stripped away from that source and hijacked for the intention to undermine the original.

 

[Viker]

Woke, DEI, etc. have become the new "n" words that the far right feels safe using, seeing how almost everyone has become a little woke enough to try and avoid using that old word.

 

[icehorse]

Woke still means what it has always meant. You've allowed it to be stripped away from that source and hijacked for the intention to undermine the original.

I think it has devolved substantially, but we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[Viker]

I think it has devolved substantially, but we'll have to agree to disagree.

That's what we're doing. Problem is, woke still means what it has always meant.

 

[icehorse]

That's what we're doing. Problem is, woke still means what it has always meant.

I'd say that for some people it means what it meant 30 years ago, but for many people these days it's taken on new, not good, connotations. And no, it's not just people on the far-right who think so, lots of classic liberals also think so.

 

[Viker]

I'd say that for some people it means what it meant 30 years ago, but for many people these days it's taken on new, not good, connotations. And no, it's not just people on the far-right who think so, lots of classic liberals also think so.

That may be because of the recent spin and smear campaign against woke in general. It's only been somewhat successful.

 

[Link]

Semantics are often a big battle in themselves. How something is defined.

 

[icehorse]

That may be because of the recent spin and smear campaign against woke in general. It's only been somewhat successful.

I think there is some spin for sure. But I also think it's devolved in dangerous ways.

There are countless examples, but let's start with one. I've attached a document which is the summary of DEI for California's Community Colleges. Do you see any problems with the ideas and messages in this document?

 

[PureX]

I'd say that for some people it means what it meant 30 years ago, but for many people these days it's taken on new, not good, connotations. And no, it's not just people on the far-right who think so, lots of classic liberals also think so.

Connotations are not reality.

Feelings aren't facts.

But the politicians and media hucksters and corporate con-men like to play on these feelings and "connotations" to take advantage of people that don't know better. People that think their feelings are facts and their connotations are reality. And I don't think we should allow "linguistics" to justify their manipulative abuse of terminology.

 

[icehorse]

Connotations are not reality.

Feelings aren't facts.

But the politicians and media hucksters and corporate con-men like to play on these feelings and "connotations" to take advantage of people that don't know better. People that think their feelings are facts and their connotations are reality. And I don't think we should allow "linguistics" to justify their manipulative abuse of terminology.

How about your thoughts - did you read the document I posted on #194? Do you see any problems with that document?

 

[Argentbear]

No, I summarized from the SOC, I didn't quote.

And as we can all recall from our logic class, if a premise is false, then everything that depends on that premise is also false.

So, there are many other issues with the SOC, but all that's necessary is to find one crucial flaw, and much of the rest will be rendered bad.

If you want to pay me, I can find many other problems with the SOC, but since I post here as a volunteer, I think I've done all I need to do to support my claim in this debate.

Bull

 

[Argentbear]

I'd say that for some people it means what it meant 30 years ago, but for many people these days it's taken on new, not good, connotations.

That is what happens when racists, homophobes, anti-Semitics hijack a word and give it a new and unrelated meaning to marginalize minorities

 

[Argentbear]

I think there is some spin for sure. But I also think it's devolved in dangerous ways.

There are countless examples, but let's start with one. I've attached a document which is the summary of DEI for California's Community Colleges. Do you see any problems with the ideas and messages in this document?

I will guess that you object to the idea that certain minorities are to be included.

If you want to pay me, I can find read the document in it's entirety and comment, but since I post here as a volunteer, I think I've done all I need to here

 

[PureX]

How about your thoughts - did you read the document I posted on #194? Do you see any problems with that document?

I don’t care about that.

The meaning of the term “woke” hasen’t changed. The word is just being deliberately corrupted and abused by people with a slanderous agenda. And I don’t see any reason to allow the study of linguistics to excuse it. There is nothing new or unique about the concept of someone experiencing a cognitive, intellectual, spiritual, or experiential awakening. People do so all the time, and always have. But at this moment in history, there happens to be a sub-group within our culture that wants to promote our collective ignorance by slandering any sort of personal awakening, because our ignorance is required to serve their agenda.

And we need to stop buying into their BS and making excuses for them. Being “woke” (awakened) is a good thing. Period. And it always has been. We should be encouraging it. Not perverting the term by misapplying it to bad behavior just so we can slander the true value of it.