What is 'Institutional racism' - on Wittgenstein, Socrates, round holes and square pegs.
The question of defining 'systemic racism' reminds me of Socrates game of definitions - for example, asking for the definition of 'virtue'. Of course, no one could define it, being an abstract concept. You actually need to give examples of virtue, a…
What is 'Institutional racism' - on Wittgenstein, Socrates, round holes and square pegs.
The question of defining 'systemic racism' reminds me of Socrates game of definitions - for example, asking for the definition of 'virtue'. Of course, no one could define it, being an abstract concept. You actually need to give examples of virtue, and each example has a different context. The concept may be a beautiful round hole in your mind, but the real world unfortunately has pegs of many shape - round, square, triangular, trapezoid...a virtual kaleidoscope of pegs!
Ludwig Wittgenstein famously said "Philosophy is a battle against the bewitchment of our intelligence by means of language." When we come up with terms, which in the end are just socially constructed, we sometimes end up reifying the abstract concept, instead of seeing if it applies to real life situations. We get hung up on the term, when we should be focusing on fixing real problems one at a time - think of the concept of 'tikkun olam', our moral obligation to repair the world - one act of kindness at a time.
A concept is a handle we use to get a fingerhold on the world we experience. The world is 'the dog' so to speak, and the concept is the tail. By reifying the concept, the tail ends up wagging the dog. We are much better off testing the hypothesis, the concept, by applying it to the real world. When we do, we see that instances of police killing unarmed people of color is very much the exception to the rule, and that they actually kill more white unarmed people than black. And these instances altogether are actually quite rare. Ideally, of course, they should never happen, but, alas, the world is imperfect, or 'perfectly imperfect, as I like to say - ergo, tikkun olam.
So the concept 'institutional racism' is another instance of the ideological tail wagging the existential dog. It has become a sacred idol in the temple of this iteration of political post-modernism. How do we know? Just try and criticize it, and watch the twitter mob rise up in holy indignation, accusing one of blasphemy, then proceed to excommunicate you - cancel, doxx, shadow ban, censor, ostracize, virtually tar and feather - and then they will happily attend your execution while knitting their Jacobin caps.
How do we treat such idols? Nietzsche wrote about just such a thing (see his book 'Twilight of the Idols). He would tap on the idols with his philosophical hammer, and, if they were found hollow, he would rear back and - smash them, quite easily...to borrow a page from the icon-destroyers on the radical left... (of course, Abraham was the original smasher of idols - but that is a whole other conversation ;- ) ).
This phenomenon we are discussing reminds of the lyrics of a certain 1968 Rolling Stones song:
'...every cop is a criminal
And all the sinners saints"
When we get caught up in the abstract terms we invent as we try and describe the world, and lose sight of the reality of the world around us, we literally become untethered from that reality. As Voltaire said, "If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities."
This whole 'anti-racism/neoracism' bit has really gotten out of hand. Martin Luther Kings Jr.'s crusade against racism, which he won in the end, was based on judging people by the content of their character and not the color of their skin. Today we are seeing the proponents of this political post-modernism's iteration as identity politics doing exactly the opposite, and in the process dishearteningly undoing MLK's work. Today we are being judged by the color of our skin, not the content of our character, to the point of teaching 10 year old grade school children that they are born racist. This, to not put too fine a point on it, is simply wrong. If this ideology were a meal at a restaurant, I'd send it back...
After all, what is more racist than prejudging people by the color of their skin - prejudice? Stereotyping? And now, neo-segregation?
When you wear institutional racism-tinted glasses, everything starts to look institutionally racist. When you have an institutionally racist hammer in your hand, a lot of things start to look like institutionally racist nails. This is what is called the self-righteous fanaticism of ideologues.
Jason L. Riley penned an excellent op-ed appearing in today's WSJ on exactly this question. https://www.wsj.com/articles/race-relations-in-america-are-better-than-ever-11619561751?mod=opinion_featst_pos1 . The fact is that race relations have never been better in this country, and this is something we should be celebrating, instead of using it as a politically partisan cudgel to tear this country apart. It is a point from which we should continue to build upon. "Build back better" - remember that? Tikkun olam.
I have imagined myself in one of those CRT lectures -- not a very likely scenario, as I am an employee of the State of Texas. At some point I would rise and inform the presenter that it's all a lot of nonsense and everyone in the room knows it.
But suppose it's not? Suppose all us white folks are born racists? That simply means that racism is our nature, and that it's natural for us to be that way. It also means it would be unnatural for us to be any other way. Is the lion evil because it eats the zebra? We are not evil or defective. There is simply nothing to be done. We were all racists when we came into this room, and we'll all be racists when we leave. Which means that this whole exercise is a monumental waste of time.
"If this ideology were a meal at a restaurant, I'd send it back..." Laughed out loud at that one. SO TRUE. More flies than soup in this bowl!
Sadly, your comment is not brief enough to be chanted by a mob. Takes a minute to read, and a lifetime of education to understand. Reading, education, and understanding are sorely lacking in our little world right now. But the mob can get behind, "Burn it down! Burn it down!"
Thought about how to 'weaponize' the message to arm a protest against PC post-modern/NeoMarxist politics. First I took Antifa, i.e. anti-fascists, who originally, back in 1930's Germany, were communists against Nazi-style fascism. Back then, Europe was divided into fascists on the right, and communists on the left. We're mirroring that situation with the hyperpartisan divide between left and right, although the right today is made up of conservatives and classical liberals/libertarians who favor free-market economics with small government. So first I thought of 'Antima" as in anti-Marxist. But, in order to not be merely copying Antifa, and to project a more positive message, I thought of 'ProLib', as in pro-Liberty, or pro-classical liberalism/libertarianism. I think 'ProLib' as in Pro-liberty, freedom, justice and equality (not 'equity') for all might make a rallying cry for the forces who oppose postmodern identity/PC/NeoMarxist politics. We do need a strong group willing to go out and challenge the far left, matching them strength for strength, in order to roll back this pernicious red tide.
So: "ProLib" (if not "AntiMa" - "AntiManistas"?)!!
What is 'Institutional racism' - on Wittgenstein, Socrates, round holes and square pegs.
The question of defining 'systemic racism' reminds me of Socrates game of definitions - for example, asking for the definition of 'virtue'. Of course, no one could define it, being an abstract concept. You actually need to give examples of virtue, and each example has a different context. The concept may be a beautiful round hole in your mind, but the real world unfortunately has pegs of many shape - round, square, triangular, trapezoid...a virtual kaleidoscope of pegs!
Ludwig Wittgenstein famously said "Philosophy is a battle against the bewitchment of our intelligence by means of language." When we come up with terms, which in the end are just socially constructed, we sometimes end up reifying the abstract concept, instead of seeing if it applies to real life situations. We get hung up on the term, when we should be focusing on fixing real problems one at a time - think of the concept of 'tikkun olam', our moral obligation to repair the world - one act of kindness at a time.
A concept is a handle we use to get a fingerhold on the world we experience. The world is 'the dog' so to speak, and the concept is the tail. By reifying the concept, the tail ends up wagging the dog. We are much better off testing the hypothesis, the concept, by applying it to the real world. When we do, we see that instances of police killing unarmed people of color is very much the exception to the rule, and that they actually kill more white unarmed people than black. And these instances altogether are actually quite rare. Ideally, of course, they should never happen, but, alas, the world is imperfect, or 'perfectly imperfect, as I like to say - ergo, tikkun olam.
So the concept 'institutional racism' is another instance of the ideological tail wagging the existential dog. It has become a sacred idol in the temple of this iteration of political post-modernism. How do we know? Just try and criticize it, and watch the twitter mob rise up in holy indignation, accusing one of blasphemy, then proceed to excommunicate you - cancel, doxx, shadow ban, censor, ostracize, virtually tar and feather - and then they will happily attend your execution while knitting their Jacobin caps.
How do we treat such idols? Nietzsche wrote about just such a thing (see his book 'Twilight of the Idols). He would tap on the idols with his philosophical hammer, and, if they were found hollow, he would rear back and - smash them, quite easily...to borrow a page from the icon-destroyers on the radical left... (of course, Abraham was the original smasher of idols - but that is a whole other conversation ;- ) ).
This phenomenon we are discussing reminds of the lyrics of a certain 1968 Rolling Stones song:
'...every cop is a criminal
And all the sinners saints"
When we get caught up in the abstract terms we invent as we try and describe the world, and lose sight of the reality of the world around us, we literally become untethered from that reality. As Voltaire said, "If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities."
This whole 'anti-racism/neoracism' bit has really gotten out of hand. Martin Luther Kings Jr.'s crusade against racism, which he won in the end, was based on judging people by the content of their character and not the color of their skin. Today we are seeing the proponents of this political post-modernism's iteration as identity politics doing exactly the opposite, and in the process dishearteningly undoing MLK's work. Today we are being judged by the color of our skin, not the content of our character, to the point of teaching 10 year old grade school children that they are born racist. This, to not put too fine a point on it, is simply wrong. If this ideology were a meal at a restaurant, I'd send it back...
After all, what is more racist than prejudging people by the color of their skin - prejudice? Stereotyping? And now, neo-segregation?
When you wear institutional racism-tinted glasses, everything starts to look institutionally racist. When you have an institutionally racist hammer in your hand, a lot of things start to look like institutionally racist nails. This is what is called the self-righteous fanaticism of ideologues.
Jason L. Riley penned an excellent op-ed appearing in today's WSJ on exactly this question. https://www.wsj.com/articles/race-relations-in-america-are-better-than-ever-11619561751?mod=opinion_featst_pos1 . The fact is that race relations have never been better in this country, and this is something we should be celebrating, instead of using it as a politically partisan cudgel to tear this country apart. It is a point from which we should continue to build upon. "Build back better" - remember that? Tikkun olam.
I have imagined myself in one of those CRT lectures -- not a very likely scenario, as I am an employee of the State of Texas. At some point I would rise and inform the presenter that it's all a lot of nonsense and everyone in the room knows it.
But suppose it's not? Suppose all us white folks are born racists? That simply means that racism is our nature, and that it's natural for us to be that way. It also means it would be unnatural for us to be any other way. Is the lion evil because it eats the zebra? We are not evil or defective. There is simply nothing to be done. We were all racists when we came into this room, and we'll all be racists when we leave. Which means that this whole exercise is a monumental waste of time.
"If this ideology were a meal at a restaurant, I'd send it back..." Laughed out loud at that one. SO TRUE. More flies than soup in this bowl!
Sadly, your comment is not brief enough to be chanted by a mob. Takes a minute to read, and a lifetime of education to understand. Reading, education, and understanding are sorely lacking in our little world right now. But the mob can get behind, "Burn it down! Burn it down!"
Thought about how to 'weaponize' the message to arm a protest against PC post-modern/NeoMarxist politics. First I took Antifa, i.e. anti-fascists, who originally, back in 1930's Germany, were communists against Nazi-style fascism. Back then, Europe was divided into fascists on the right, and communists on the left. We're mirroring that situation with the hyperpartisan divide between left and right, although the right today is made up of conservatives and classical liberals/libertarians who favor free-market economics with small government. So first I thought of 'Antima" as in anti-Marxist. But, in order to not be merely copying Antifa, and to project a more positive message, I thought of 'ProLib', as in pro-Liberty, or pro-classical liberalism/libertarianism. I think 'ProLib' as in Pro-liberty, freedom, justice and equality (not 'equity') for all might make a rallying cry for the forces who oppose postmodern identity/PC/NeoMarxist politics. We do need a strong group willing to go out and challenge the far left, matching them strength for strength, in order to roll back this pernicious red tide.
So: "ProLib" (if not "AntiMa" - "AntiManistas"?)!!