A minor point, but "showing your work" can be carried to extremes. My kindergartener keeps getting pestered about "how she knows" that 5 is more than 3 and similar trivialities.
"The idea that showing your work is white supremacy is an idea so absurd that it ought to be laughed right out of academia. The fact that it's not shows that we're on a very dangerous course. Why even have schools at all if facts are racist?"
Or any groups of people moving toward a common goal other than received religion. That's what "showing your work" is, really -- discussing your work in a way that allows you and others to move, as a group, toward a goal. There's a reason why we're still doing politics the same way we did it four thousand years ago, while the sciences have actually advanced noticeably. Bring required to show your work turns math and every other subject from a solitary pursuit to a group pursuit. It makes numbers into a bridge for connection between individual human minds.
And without that bridge-building and using information as a way to connect to others, there can be no advance for traditionally underprivileged communities. How the hell can minorities, women, and other people who have been oppressed move forward unless we all agree on what we want to achieve? And how can we reach that agreement without showing our damned work?! *sigh*
Sometimes I think these people are like an ultra-right infiltration group. This nonsense is the best way to cripple movements to advance minorities, women, and other traditionally oppressed people.
Showing your work is what allows you to identify and learn from your mistakes! It's absolutely maddening: deprive students of a highly effective tool for leaning, because there are no such things as right and wrong answers, that's just white supremacy culture! The cynicism at work in this ideoligy is breathtaking.
If you haven't already read it, I've been recommending Cynical Theories, by Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay. It's a brilliant and concise analysis of the crazy ideas behind woke ideology, the authors have done us all a real service by wading through the woke fever swamps and breaking it all down (as the original texts are almost impossible to comprehend). Everyone here should should read that book, I can't recommend it highly enough.
His channel is called "New Discourses", as is his Web site. It is very good, but unfortunately it attracts ultra-right trolls to the comments sections, and James lately sounds a bit too emotionally invested in his project. I was disapponted that he and Benjamin Boyce voiced support for Donald Trump as the better of two evils. However, the work of Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay is the best readily accessible source that I have seen of material dissecting Wokeness.
Well the reason he attracts ultra-right trolls must be because the left have disowned him and have no interest in his work and do not comment. The left should make comment on his blog and challenge the rightists. But it is deeper than that. I have a feeling that the left is unable to challenge the right on this matter because in this case the right are the principled liberals and the left are the anti-liberals. A role reversal.
There are many people on the Left who reject Wokeism, at least in its most extreme forms. The "Harper's Letter" of last year was a sign of that. What we have in many countries is a flight from reality, with Critical Theory overturning reason and truth on the Left, and blatant lies on the Right (e.g. Trump's election claims in the US, Kaczy┼Дski's promotion of the lie that a terrorist plot brought down the Presidential plane in Smolensk in 2010).
Note that an increasing number of critics (and victims) of Wokeness come from the Left, and they are conversing with those on the Right. However, the liberal Right needs to reject the irrational and anti-democratic actors such as Trump's Republican Party and Kaczynski's Law and Justice Party, just as the liberal Left must oppose Wokeness. The nationalist authoritarian Right and Critical Theory Left are two sides of the same irrational, destructive coin.
Yes I agree. The Right is guilty of conspiracy theories (even though Trump despite his pronouncements, did not take any extra-legal steps, while in the White House). But the left is increasingly joining that standard with the conspiracy theory that all cis white men are misogynists and racists and harbour 'unconscious bias'. That there are hidden nexus of systemic racism in our institutions, constitution, and laws.
Frankly I don't see the Right taking over our institutions such as schools, academia, mainstream media, culture, monopoly multinational corporations, and government - all affected by the culture wars. So I think equating the loony woke left with the hilly billies is rather unjustified. Show me a liberal Right that defends Alex Jones or QAnon or white supremacists. Even the Proud Boys denounce these actors. But the liberal Left are like the proverbial deer mesmerized by the headlights. And they understandably greatly fear the cancel culture. Given that the woke left have greatly subverted our institutions (the military is their next target), it is imperative for the liberal Left to stand up to their principles.
I agree with most of what you say, but both of these extremes threaten to overthrow democratic norms, the Right more so in the US due to the regional imbalance of representation built into the Constitution, which the Trump Republicans are trying to exploit with their myriad voter suppression bills in state legislatures.
Yes, both extremes pose a danger to democracy. If you look at the 20th century, the communists were more brutal than the National Socialists, in terms of body count. In fact the latter were defeated by conservative freedom and liberal democracy loving people (such as Churchill), and not by the Left. While the socialist Left was defending and apologizing for Lenin and Stalin before and after the war.
As far as I know, the republican push to regulate voting at the state level simply requires that people identify themselves with a valid ID at the voting booth. Otherwise you will have rampant cheating as people will vote multiple times. And what the Democrats claimed that water cannot be distributed to people in the line, is a blatant lie. Only food and water offered by a political party or a candidate is banned for obvious reasons. Otherwise the city or a charity or the electors can offer what they wish.
In fact Blacks have said they find it very insulting and racist that some white people are claiming that Blacks are too messed up to be able to obtain an ID card.
It can be tough sledding, that's true. In grad school, I was force fed much of the 'theory' they look at, they manage to make to make that stuff reasonably understandable, which is no small feat!
I sincerely hope that BPS will find a reasonable and balanced way to address the observed imbalance, but I think it's probably unlikely, as too much of the pressure they are responding to is not from reasonable and balanced critics, and will not be satisfied with anything less than total domination of the entire school system by CRT.
I have similar qualms about police reform. I strongly support substantial reforms in policing and the criminal justice system. But that reform needs to be nuanced and responsive to evidence and rational evaluation, and I strongly distrust many of the prominent activists pushing for changes based on dogmatic ideological blinders, and disdain neutral evaluation of evidence or effectiveness. They are likely to fail to achieve the positive goals while creating larger problems in other areas - like rising crime rates that ultimately push the voters to reject liberalism (based on its dysfunctional and il-liberal current real world manifestation, not its historic values) and accept, reluctantly or enthusiastically, the authoritarians who present themselves as the only ones able to stand up to the dogma, perhaps accurately. Rather than making the trains run on time (Italian Fascist reference), the new authoritarians from the right will promise to again teach your children the mathematics which allow planes to not fall out of the sky.
Of course, the other dystopian outcome would be a permanent domination by an authoritarian left. Neither is attractive.
A minor point, but "showing your work" can be carried to extremes. My kindergartener keeps getting pestered about "how she knows" that 5 is more than 3 and similar trivialities.
"The idea that showing your work is white supremacy is an idea so absurd that it ought to be laughed right out of academia. The fact that it's not shows that we're on a very dangerous course. Why even have schools at all if facts are racist?"
Or any groups of people moving toward a common goal other than received religion. That's what "showing your work" is, really -- discussing your work in a way that allows you and others to move, as a group, toward a goal. There's a reason why we're still doing politics the same way we did it four thousand years ago, while the sciences have actually advanced noticeably. Bring required to show your work turns math and every other subject from a solitary pursuit to a group pursuit. It makes numbers into a bridge for connection between individual human minds.
And without that bridge-building and using information as a way to connect to others, there can be no advance for traditionally underprivileged communities. How the hell can minorities, women, and other people who have been oppressed move forward unless we all agree on what we want to achieve? And how can we reach that agreement without showing our damned work?! *sigh*
Sometimes I think these people are like an ultra-right infiltration group. This nonsense is the best way to cripple movements to advance minorities, women, and other traditionally oppressed people.
Showing your work is what allows you to identify and learn from your mistakes! It's absolutely maddening: deprive students of a highly effective tool for leaning, because there are no such things as right and wrong answers, that's just white supremacy culture! The cynicism at work in this ideoligy is breathtaking.
If you haven't already read it, I've been recommending Cynical Theories, by Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay. It's a brilliant and concise analysis of the crazy ideas behind woke ideology, the authors have done us all a real service by wading through the woke fever swamps and breaking it all down (as the original texts are almost impossible to comprehend). Everyone here should should read that book, I can't recommend it highly enough.
James Lindsay has many podcasts and panel discussions on YouTube. They are must sees. He explains this phenomena called cultural Marxism.
His channel is called "New Discourses", as is his Web site. It is very good, but unfortunately it attracts ultra-right trolls to the comments sections, and James lately sounds a bit too emotionally invested in his project. I was disapponted that he and Benjamin Boyce voiced support for Donald Trump as the better of two evils. However, the work of Helen Pluckrose and James Lindsay is the best readily accessible source that I have seen of material dissecting Wokeness.
Well the reason he attracts ultra-right trolls must be because the left have disowned him and have no interest in his work and do not comment. The left should make comment on his blog and challenge the rightists. But it is deeper than that. I have a feeling that the left is unable to challenge the right on this matter because in this case the right are the principled liberals and the left are the anti-liberals. A role reversal.
There are many people on the Left who reject Wokeism, at least in its most extreme forms. The "Harper's Letter" of last year was a sign of that. What we have in many countries is a flight from reality, with Critical Theory overturning reason and truth on the Left, and blatant lies on the Right (e.g. Trump's election claims in the US, Kaczy┼Дski's promotion of the lie that a terrorist plot brought down the Presidential plane in Smolensk in 2010).
Note that an increasing number of critics (and victims) of Wokeness come from the Left, and they are conversing with those on the Right. However, the liberal Right needs to reject the irrational and anti-democratic actors such as Trump's Republican Party and Kaczynski's Law and Justice Party, just as the liberal Left must oppose Wokeness. The nationalist authoritarian Right and Critical Theory Left are two sides of the same irrational, destructive coin.
Yes I agree. The Right is guilty of conspiracy theories (even though Trump despite his pronouncements, did not take any extra-legal steps, while in the White House). But the left is increasingly joining that standard with the conspiracy theory that all cis white men are misogynists and racists and harbour 'unconscious bias'. That there are hidden nexus of systemic racism in our institutions, constitution, and laws.
Frankly I don't see the Right taking over our institutions such as schools, academia, mainstream media, culture, monopoly multinational corporations, and government - all affected by the culture wars. So I think equating the loony woke left with the hilly billies is rather unjustified. Show me a liberal Right that defends Alex Jones or QAnon or white supremacists. Even the Proud Boys denounce these actors. But the liberal Left are like the proverbial deer mesmerized by the headlights. And they understandably greatly fear the cancel culture. Given that the woke left have greatly subverted our institutions (the military is their next target), it is imperative for the liberal Left to stand up to their principles.
I agree with most of what you say, but both of these extremes threaten to overthrow democratic norms, the Right more so in the US due to the regional imbalance of representation built into the Constitution, which the Trump Republicans are trying to exploit with their myriad voter suppression bills in state legislatures.
Yes, both extremes pose a danger to democracy. If you look at the 20th century, the communists were more brutal than the National Socialists, in terms of body count. In fact the latter were defeated by conservative freedom and liberal democracy loving people (such as Churchill), and not by the Left. While the socialist Left was defending and apologizing for Lenin and Stalin before and after the war.
As far as I know, the republican push to regulate voting at the state level simply requires that people identify themselves with a valid ID at the voting booth. Otherwise you will have rampant cheating as people will vote multiple times. And what the Democrats claimed that water cannot be distributed to people in the line, is a blatant lie. Only food and water offered by a political party or a candidate is banned for obvious reasons. Otherwise the city or a charity or the electors can offer what they wish.
In fact Blacks have said they find it very insulting and racist that some white people are claiming that Blacks are too messed up to be able to obtain an ID card.
Excellent book. Not an easy read though.
Also you can see Helen Pluckrose in a TriggerNometry podcast done about 6 weeks ago.
It can be tough sledding, that's true. In grad school, I was force fed much of the 'theory' they look at, they manage to make to make that stuff reasonably understandable, which is no small feat!
Yes! They are incredible pranksters, I'm sure Lenny Bruce is smiling down on them!
Thanks for that perspective.
I sincerely hope that BPS will find a reasonable and balanced way to address the observed imbalance, but I think it's probably unlikely, as too much of the pressure they are responding to is not from reasonable and balanced critics, and will not be satisfied with anything less than total domination of the entire school system by CRT.
I have similar qualms about police reform. I strongly support substantial reforms in policing and the criminal justice system. But that reform needs to be nuanced and responsive to evidence and rational evaluation, and I strongly distrust many of the prominent activists pushing for changes based on dogmatic ideological blinders, and disdain neutral evaluation of evidence or effectiveness. They are likely to fail to achieve the positive goals while creating larger problems in other areas - like rising crime rates that ultimately push the voters to reject liberalism (based on its dysfunctional and il-liberal current real world manifestation, not its historic values) and accept, reluctantly or enthusiastically, the authoritarians who present themselves as the only ones able to stand up to the dogma, perhaps accurately. Rather than making the trains run on time (Italian Fascist reference), the new authoritarians from the right will promise to again teach your children the mathematics which allow planes to not fall out of the sky.
Of course, the other dystopian outcome would be a permanent domination by an authoritarian left. Neither is attractive.