Author Topic: "Rules of Engagement," article on modern debate-me culture from The New Republic  (Read 6907 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online Ah.hell

  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • **********
  • Posts: 13158
(click to show/hide)
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=cultural+appropriation+site%3A.edu
Kind of BS really.   
Can you show me evidence of your contention? 
Nope, that's up to you to prove me right. 

Also the results are a bunch of links to different article, doesn't really say much about the consensus. 

Offline random poet

  • That's bullshit!
  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2048
  • On n'a jamais le temps, le temps nous a.
    • I have a LJ
I am still waiting for superdave to name some of these experts who support the concept of cultural appropriation.

Yes, quetz, you have abundantly demonstrated your lack of understanding of that concept. Would you just give it a goddamn rest? That is the whole point of this thread. How about you read the article a few more times? It might help! Probably not, though!

I have some questions and objections to the concept, I even quoted them. No attempt has been made to answer them, instead I am met with ad hominems. Harry Black and you are apparently impressed.

My tentative conclusion is that neither you, Harry Black, or heyalison have the ability to make a substantive reply to these questions and objections. It would certainly explain why it has so far not come. As for the reason the three of you support this concept despite seemingly not being able to defend it against critiques and objections, I can only speculate.
I am unwilling to "defend it against critiques and objections" because this is not a debate and I don't have to defend anything. Your demands that random internet people prove established concepts to you are boorish. I am not an expert on the subject, the experts all agree on this concept, your questions are assinine and irrelevant, and I don't give a shit anymore; it is up to you to educate yourself.

If your answer is "well the people who have devoted their professional lives as scholars of this subject are wrong," that says a lot more about you.
Aujourd'hui j'ai vu un facteur joyeux.

Online Harry Black

  • International Man of Mystery
  • Global Moderator
  • Poster of Extraordinary Magnitude
  • *****
  • Posts: 15648
(click to show/hide)
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=cultural+appropriation+site%3A.edu
Kind of BS really.   
Can you show me evidence of your contention? 
Nope, that's up to you to prove me right. 

Also the results are a bunch of links to different article, doesn't really say much about the consensus.
The point is that if you are genuinely interested in a topic and are asking such basic questions then it would probably behove you to go and do some bare basic research.

If you refuse to do so because of a generally accepted practice of debate then it says a lot about your intent to learn vs your devotion to a format. You wont be any more right or wrong in an objective sense by them going and delivering links to you, but you arent doing the basic work that one might expect of someone who has decided they disagree with an idea.

This is debatemebro culture rearing its head in trying to force a debate where people have said or implied they are not interested in it and then declaring victory (of the non debate) when people choose not to engage.

And it may have cost us yet another forum member mere days ago.

Online John Albert

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 6023
(click to show/hide)
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=cultural+appropriation+site%3A.edu
Kind of BS really.   
Can you show me evidence of your contention? 
Nope, that's up to you to prove me right. 

Also the results are a bunch of links to different article, doesn't really say much about the consensus.

The results look a lot like an ongoing debate about what constitutes cultural appropriation. Even the articles that advocate most strongly for the concept show a tendency to admit that it's very subjective and context-dependent.

This is not like questioning the existence of an empirical fact like global warming or the effectiveness of vaccines. Social theories are not data-driven scientific models, but more akin to commentary or persuasive writing about social issues.

I haven't seen anybody around here demanding a debate. There's a lively discussion going on about a topic in a thread, and anybody is free to participate or not participate. Just because somebody may disagree, that is no reason to lash out at them with personal attacks.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2019, 03:17:07 PM by John Albert »

Offline Quetzalcoatl

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4805
I am still waiting for superdave to name some of these experts who support the concept of cultural appropriation.

Yes, quetz, you have abundantly demonstrated your lack of understanding of that concept. Would you just give it a goddamn rest? That is the whole point of this thread. How about you read the article a few more times? It might help! Probably not, though!

I have some questions and objections to the concept, I even quoted them. No attempt has been made to answer them, instead I am met with ad hominems. Harry Black and you are apparently impressed.

My tentative conclusion is that neither you, Harry Black, or heyalison have the ability to make a substantive reply to these questions and objections. It would certainly explain why it has so far not come. As for the reason the three of you support this concept despite seemingly not being able to defend it against critiques and objections, I can only speculate.
I am unwilling to "defend it against critiques and objections" because this is not a debate and I don't have to defend anything. Your demands that random internet people prove established concepts to you are boorish. I am not an expert on the subject, the experts all agree on this concept, your questions are assinine and irrelevant, and I don't give a shit anymore; it is up to you to educate yourself.

If your answer is "well the people who have devoted their professional lives as scholars of this subject are wrong," that says a lot more about you.

Again, who are these scholars that all agree? We are still not being told. It is not an established concept outside of certain corners of American college campuses. If you ask a 100 random people on the street here if they have heard about it, almost none will (they will have heard of evolution and climate change).

And I am not going to accept the belief without good reason. That the belief is part of the belief-system of your political tribe and your identity is irrelevant. I'm not going to take it on faith. And if you and heyalison don't want your pet ideas to be discussed or debated, it is a very asinine idea to create a thread about it on an internet forum.
"I’m a member of no party. I have no ideology. I’m a rationalist. I do what I can in the international struggle between science and reason and the barbarism, superstition and stupidity that’s all around us." - Christopher Hitchens

Online John Albert

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 6023
If your answer is "well the people who have devoted their professional lives as scholars of this subject are wrong," that says a lot more about you.

I'm not sure I agree with this line of reasoning.

Lots of people devote their professional lives to scholarship of subjects that are wrong, or at the very least unfalsifiable. One could make a very long list starting with theology and running the gamut all the way to alternative medicine practices.

Offline Quetzalcoatl

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4805
(click to show/hide)
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=cultural+appropriation+site%3A.edu
Kind of BS really.   
Can you show me evidence of your contention? 
Nope, that's up to you to prove me right. 

Also the results are a bunch of links to different article, doesn't really say much about the consensus.
The point is that if you are genuinely interested in a topic and are asking such basic questions then it would probably behove you to go and do some bare basic research.

If you refuse to do so because of a generally accepted practice of debate then it says a lot about your intent to learn vs your devotion to a format. You wont be any more right or wrong in an objective sense by them going and delivering links to you, but you arent doing the basic work that one might expect of someone who has decided they disagree with an idea.

This is debatemebro culture rearing its head in trying to force a debate where people have said or implied they are not interested in it and then declaring victory (of the non debate) when people choose not to engage.

And it may have cost us yet another forum member mere days ago.

This is elaborate special pleading.

It takes less than 10 seconds to google for the consensus on global warming and on evolution. They are all suggested by Google when I start to write, indicating that these are subjects people search for on a re-occurring basis. No such suggestion is given for cultural appropriation, and the findings of the result don't point to any consensus. The concept does seem to be rather ill-defined.

If you post on an internet forum and insist that you don't want the subject of the post discussed, what is the point? Why even post it at all?

It was stated that there is an expert consensus on cultural appropriation and asked for a source for the claim. You then come along and try to stamp that out. I'm not going to believe it because someone you admires says so.

Can I start a thread about Harry Black, claim various things about him, and insist that I am not interested in debating this, and therefore refuse to back up any claims?
"I’m a member of no party. I have no ideology. I’m a rationalist. I do what I can in the international struggle between science and reason and the barbarism, superstition and stupidity that’s all around us." - Christopher Hitchens

Offline Quetzalcoatl

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4805
If your answer is "well the people who have devoted their professional lives as scholars of this subject are wrong," that says a lot more about you.

I'm not sure I agree with this line of reasoning.

Lots of people devote their professional lives to scholarship of subjects that are wrong, or at the very least unfalsifiable. One could make a very long list starting with theology and running the gamut all the way to alternative medicine practices.

All homeopaths agree that homeopathy works.
"I’m a member of no party. I have no ideology. I’m a rationalist. I do what I can in the international struggle between science and reason and the barbarism, superstition and stupidity that’s all around us." - Christopher Hitchens

Offline Quetzalcoatl

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4805
And it may have cost us yet another forum member mere days ago.

You mean like this?

Quote
Stay out of the politics forum, it's toxic. Basically a few alt-right troll types, and a few screeching ultra-libs drown out otherwise useful information. Better content on skepticism subreddits.

How about the self-introspection that you suggested to people who disagree with you?
"I’m a member of no party. I have no ideology. I’m a rationalist. I do what I can in the international struggle between science and reason and the barbarism, superstition and stupidity that’s all around us." - Christopher Hitchens

Offline random poet

  • That's bullshit!
  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2048
  • On n'a jamais le temps, le temps nous a.
    • I have a LJ
(…)
Again, who are these scholars that all agree? We are still not being told. It is not an established concept outside of certain corners of American college campuses. If you ask a 100 random people on the street here if they have heard about it, almost none will (they will have heard of evolution and climate change).

And I am not going to accept the belief without good reason. That the belief is part of the belief-system of your political tribe and your identity is irrelevant. I'm not going to take it on faith. And if you and heyalison don't want your pet ideas to be discussed or debated, it is a very asinine idea to create a thread about it on an internet forum.
[/quote]
Again, I don't have to tell you shit. I don't care what you think about CA. Educate your own damn self. Or don't. Your opinion is irrelevant.

Philosophy is attacked by skeptics all the time for being "subjective" or "unproven." I'm not going to sit here and explain 3000 years of scholarship to you, just to get you to accept CA, or intersectional feminism, or any other basic concept, or why they are different from pseudoscience. For some reason, people seem to think they can become experts on these subjects by reading a couple articles. I read about astronomy all the time, does that make me an astrophysicist? Move over, NASA, I'll fix that rocket for you!
Aujourd'hui j'ai vu un facteur joyeux.

Offline Quetzalcoatl

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4805
In this interview on StarTalk, around 5:20, Steve makes an off the cuff joke about cultural appropriation, and they laugh at it.
"I’m a member of no party. I have no ideology. I’m a rationalist. I do what I can in the international struggle between science and reason and the barbarism, superstition and stupidity that’s all around us." - Christopher Hitchens

Online John Albert

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 6023
Philosophy is attacked by skeptics all the time for being "subjective" or "unproven."

Which is quite ironic because skepticism is itself a philosophical concept.

But it's also important to recognize that discussion and debate are the primary activities of philosophy.


In this interview on StarTalk, around 5:20, Steve makes an off the cuff joke about cultural appropriation, and they laugh at it.

It's clear that he understands the concept well enough to make a good joke about it.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2019, 04:25:12 PM by John Albert »

Online John Albert

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 6023
I like this.  I grok it down to my core.  It entirely informs my social justice leanings.  "History has selectively concealed the experience of reality felt by people without power."

Isn't that the primary motivation behind Howard Zinn's historiographic approach? 

Online brilligtove

  • Too Much Spare Time
  • ********
  • Posts: 7128
  • Ignorance can be cured. Stupidity, you deal with.
I didn't expect Quez to deny racism is a thing, for example.

Where did I do that?

If you make such a public, specific statement or accusation like that, you absolutely owe it to substantiate it, or retract and apologize.

Since you are apparently not going to substantiate your slander, I can play this game too.

I really didn't expect brilligtove to deny the suffering of First Nations in Canada and Canadian society, both historically and contemporary.

Your denial of racism is blatant in this thread:

(click to show/hide)

As for your claim that I'm slandering you...



Still, it isn't libel or slander if it is true.

This is in contrast to your actual libel - or at least lies - about what I have said. In the same thread about Canada you can find several specific quotes from me about the heinous shit Canada has done.

I'll check back in another week or two.
evidence trumps experience | performance over perfection | responsibility – authority = scapegoat | emotions motivate; data doesn't

Offline Quetzalcoatl

  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 4805
This is where I started to wonder if you're an intelligent racist working to corrupt our community.

Clearly, you don't really deserve any response. But here we go...

I didn't expect Quez to deny racism is a thing, for example.

Where did I do that?

If you make such a public, specific statement or accusation like that, you absolutely owe it to substantiate it, or retract and apologize.

Since you are apparently not going to substantiate your slander, I can play this game too.

I really didn't expect brilligtove to deny the suffering of First Nations in Canada and Canadian society, both historically and contemporary.

Your denial of racism is blatant in this thread:

(click to show/hide)


None of this establishes that I am a racist, or that I deny that racism is a thing. You will have to point out the exact quotes that to your mind do so.

And my claim was never that the US does not have issues.

And can you clarify how I "corrupt" the community?

As for your claim that I'm slandering you...



Still, it isn't libel or slander if it is true.

This is in contrast to your actual libel - or at least lies - about what I have said. In the same thread about Canada you can find several specific quotes from me about the heinous shit Canada has done.

I'll check back in another week or two.

I'm not interested in semantics here. English is not my first language, and you understood very well what I meant. My English is still better than your Swedish. My Norwegian is probably better than your Norwegian...
"I’m a member of no party. I have no ideology. I’m a rationalist. I do what I can in the international struggle between science and reason and the barbarism, superstition and stupidity that’s all around us." - Christopher Hitchens

 

personate-rain
personate-rain