[Xmca-l] Re: structure and agency
Huw Lloyd
huw.softdesigns@gmail.com
Wed Jul 1 01:44:37 PDT 2020
One could say that dialectics is only a partial account of the logic of
mediation. Perhaps structuralism, to the degree that it differs, has some
contribution or exercises some aspect of this. A robust study of
institutions should include both a means of studying institutional
malignancy and also their scope of operations. It is important to heed the
prerogative of the institution for self-maintenance. When this
self-maintenance is not predicated upon legitimate service then malignancy
ensues. Hence the idealist hope for remediating 'black lives' placed in
governmental reform seems misplaced.
Huw
On Wed, 1 Jul 2020 at 05:47, Andy Blunden <andyb@marxists.org> wrote:
> "Contradiction" is only a coherent concept insofar as there is a "logic",
> i.e., some institution. The general idea is that all logics contain such
> contradictions. Institutions "try" to eliminate contradictions and
> instantiate a "logic," but it turns out to be a losing battle.
>
> Nonetheless, an institution can live forever without changing despite
> harbouring contradictions. The structure has to be subject to critique; the
> contradictions have to be exposed and pursued. Movement and change is not
> automatic.
>
> But yes, you are right, life, let alone social life, is impossible without
> "institutions." We continue building that aeroplane as it flies through the
> sky. Without institutions, norms, shared meanings, collaborative
> activities, trust we will all die.
>
> Andy
> ------------------------------
> *Andy Blunden*
> Hegel for Social Movements
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://brill.com/view/title/54574__;!!Mih3wA!Vbo2U2NxoEFafJtBUR40AtvkBVYT1KAKn_9LlHZa_fRicMs7nWhBIVZhw2mOPL4Daq3h8g$>
> Home Page
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm__;!!Mih3wA!Vbo2U2NxoEFafJtBUR40AtvkBVYT1KAKn_9LlHZa_fRicMs7nWhBIVZhw2mOPL4TN5Z-gg$>
> On 1/07/2020 2:16 pm, mike cole wrote:
>
> Andy -- You write that " The structure is *built around*
> *contradictions" *
> Would it be useful to say, also, that "structures *contain* the *contradictions
> *minist in social life?
> I am asking because i am thinking of institutions as sociocultural
> structures that coordinate constituent
> activities sufficiently to enable human biocuturalsocial re-production..
> mike
> and g'night!
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 9:06 PM Andy Blunden <andyb@marxists.org> wrote:
>
>> At first glance Hegel and Marx appear to have erected giant structures,
>> which explicate how a social formation reproduces itself. I.e., they look
>> like structuralists. But look again. At the heart of Hegel's *Logic *and
>> Marx's *Capital *is a contradiction. The structure is built around
>> *contradictions*. Under the impact of critique, at a certain point, the
>> contradiction(s) unfolds as social transformation.
>>
>> Yrjo Engestrom has endeavoured to incorporate this idea in his system
>> with its 4-levels of contradiction, and Ilyenkov explains in detail how
>> Marx and Hegel did it in his 1960 monograph "The Abstract and Concrete in
>> Marx's *Capital*."
>>
>> andy
>> ------------------------------
>> *Andy Blunden*
>> Hegel for Social Movements
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://brill.com/view/title/54574__;!!Mih3wA!VrJ6ogmE0QXMa3fMTmRp6YRhgzkXCIbZ0jSEci2-B6Gvtituftx_3TXEEt7HTGjjKVnsjw$>
>> Home Page
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm__;!!Mih3wA!VrJ6ogmE0QXMa3fMTmRp6YRhgzkXCIbZ0jSEci2-B6Gvtituftx_3TXEEt7HTGhl_8RK9w$>
>> On 1/07/2020 1:42 pm, mike cole wrote:
>>
>> David,Andy. So what has transformational agency to do with the
>> distinctions you are making?
>> Mike
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 7:04 PM Andy Blunden <andyb@marxists.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I beg to differ with you David. "Structuralism" dates from the beginning
>>> of the 20th century and poststructuralism from the 1970s roughly. That
>>> there were structuralist tendencies in Marx's writing is undeniable, and
>>> likewise with Hegel and with Vygotsky. But as I see it, "Structuralism" and
>>> "Poststructuralism" are specific historically bounded projects. I agree
>>> that both of these projects have had an impact or influence on the
>>> development of Critical Theory and CHAT, but neither are "structuralist."
>>>
>>> -
>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/concrete-historicism.pdf__;!!Mih3wA!U1fvp9wYVAl9tljWqr4zvO8FdaHI0Za42Z3RRQtNjbJa3mUTny0MXMlHBkW9Zbps0mHL0g$
>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/pdfs/concrete-historicism.pdf__;!!Mih3wA!VhKMxK62RuHFPtSiafVaIhcBWu6Corlc8Jwv8StB7faR8dToPmZRX0GyVindCZxvdPoTlw$>
>>>
>>> Andy
>>> ------------------------------
>>> *Andy Blunden*
>>> Hegel for Social Movements
>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://brill.com/view/title/54574__;!!Mih3wA!VhKMxK62RuHFPtSiafVaIhcBWu6Corlc8Jwv8StB7faR8dToPmZRX0GyVindCZwfv_bGZg$>
>>> Home Page
>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.ethicalpolitics.org/ablunden/index.htm__;!!Mih3wA!VhKMxK62RuHFPtSiafVaIhcBWu6Corlc8Jwv8StB7faR8dToPmZRX0GyVindCZwpXrkYXg$>
>>> On 1/07/2020 10:35 am, David H Kirshner wrote:
>>>
>>> Mike,
>>>
>>> Marx and Vygotsky both were structural theorists. My guess/impression is
>>> that as critical theory and sociocultural theory evolved both have been
>>> influenced by poststructural thought, but neither has made a true
>>> poststructural turn; nor have scholars in either arena really grappled with
>>> the implications of such a turn.
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu
>>> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> *On
>>> Behalf Of *mike cole
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 30, 2020 6:59 PM
>>> *To:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>> <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: Your views on a question.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> That was a very clarifying note, David, thanks. So is cultural marxism
>>> one way to deal with mutability or stability of structure?
>>>
>>> Most of the marxist social science I am reading these days focuses on
>>> transformational agency and take their roots from Vygotsky
>>>
>>> and (various )predecessors, so this is post-structuralist Marxism?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> mike
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 6:19 AM David H Kirshner <dkirsh@lsu.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>> S’ma et al.,
>>>
>>> The issue of victimhood and “victim mentality” is roiled by
>>> crosscurrents of modernist and postmodernist, structuralist and
>>> poststructuralist thought. Victim mentality is always perspectival—I have
>>> been wronged. In a modernist frame, the perspective of victim may be able
>>> to be aligned with an overarching (i.e., structuralist) account that
>>> authorizes its significance. Critical theory, stemming from Marxist theory,
>>> is such a structuralist account—or perhaps, more accurately, a
>>> structuralist project as it is not clear that critical theorists have
>>> arrived at consensus about the theory. Postmodernism and poststructuralism
>>> abandon the structuralist mandate, accepting that there is no bedrock
>>> structural perspective that can encompass the variety of local
>>> perspectives. So my sense of my victimhood is simply my perspective, and
>>> the project of establishing its viability is purely a political one. Any of
>>> us can experience ourselves as victims, and assert a political claim to
>>> that effect. Interestingly, it is the political Right that embodies this
>>> poststructuralist critique of victimhood, and the political Left that
>>> orients itself in structuralism.
>>>
>>> David
>>>
>>> *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>> *On Behalf Of *Simangele Mayisela
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 30, 2020 5:25 AM
>>> *To:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: Your views on a question.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Annalisa and colleagues
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you for processing my earlier articulation in such an impeccable
>>> manner. I see how your method of using definitions as a foundation for
>>> conversations, specially sensitive conversations in a multicultural forum
>>> such as this one. You have beautifully demonstrated that in your response
>>> below and in some of your previous enlightening contributions.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Your reference to the George Orwell’s 1984 is quite fitting in this
>>> situation; when a victim expresses that they are victimised, they are then
>>> “gaslighted”, as there is something seriously wrong with their mentality –
>>> the victim mentality. It is short of saying “do not think” that you are
>>> victimised even if there is “victimisation”, or you “were” victimised.
>>> Perhaps we can accept better with “survivors” but the conditions and the
>>> context under which” survivors” continue to survive.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Ok then, then the survivors develop a concept, “Critical Theory” to
>>> name, and shine light on the hidden aspects of “survivorhood”, where the
>>> conditions for thinking about or “reflecting” surviving are determined and
>>> controlled, even those who have power – “scientific or unscientific”.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> There is undeniable history of efforts and activities of survivors of
>>> different forms oppressions and genocides, where generations of survivors
>>> have shown resilience and the ability to move on, but only to be met with
>>> new and systematic ways of psychological and economic oppression. Leaving
>>> them with no option but to survive by different means at the disposal,
>>> including becoming religious with the home for future redemption. Of more
>>> interest to me are those who keep trying using “enlightened” ways by
>>> intellectually explaining to themselves as a collective and to the
>>> oppressor with the hope to bring about change for their situation – the
>>> “doing something about their situation.” Using the analogy of a monopoly
>>> game Tameka Jones Young
>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10158129729940856&id=522190855__;!!Mih3wA!U1fvp9wYVAl9tljWqr4zvO8FdaHI0Za42Z3RRQtNjbJa3mUTny0MXMlHBkW9Zbr1_-Tb9A$
>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2F*2Fnam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com*2F*3Furl*3Dhttps*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2F*2Fm.facebook.com*2Fstory.php*3Fstory_fbid*3D10158129729940856*26id*3D522190855__*3B!!Mih3wA!VX_uq7D0v43DAvM9nEC46ZStRpXjResRedVQUr9zhmuKYSRyZ34CmtUCYxxDViAr2G5ncg*24*26data*3D02*7C01*7Cdkirsh*40lsu.edu*7C3980c805ddde48ffcda308d81ce02bb5*7C2d4dad3f50ae47d983a09ae2b1f466f8*7C0*7C0*7C637291096420272281*26sdata*3DwTDn9GfEmrNWmDs7ZKaYDsB6FZCeMUVhqsyWF9XzaeE*3D*26reserved*3D0__*3BJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!Mih3wA!XgF09Z_7Jf5M7eawhdePrcY6Ga6UVHH-Wen9Vq7UBXWfzeFgYdOg20ED5HIi0LWe6MGJgg*24&data=02*7C01*7Cdkirsh*40lsu.edu*7C793f465e2c064597a6ec08d81d52307d*7C2d4dad3f50ae47d983a09ae2b1f466f8*7C0*7C0*7C637291586126470977&sdata=Uuw6Xaz8ott*2FqhOnnPfx1NVKD7viv29J7hBq6yDOtQU*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUqKioqKioqKioqKioqKiolJSoqKioqKioqJSUqJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!Mih3wA!WBb97M0rnCTuW6rx_rhYvkAPQLCK1TlHV1j2_71whs8hUwhp1NiF5m7opU1Tv5D4stnMCQ$>
>>> (please watch if you a minute to spare) , has a way that highlights why
>>> “victim mentality” is not an appropriate, or rather demeaning of those who
>>> are working hard to be free, let alone to be at par with the oppressors’
>>> “survivors” if I may say so. The video is in the context of the gruesome
>>> protests after the murder of George Floyd, perhaps what is important for
>>> this conversation is the content, the meaning of her articulations, though
>>> her expressions are accompanied by very strong emotions, I found her
>>> monopoly analogy worth my reflection.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I must say I owe it to myself to try draw some links between Cultural
>>> Historical Activity Theory, Critical Race Theory and Social Justice theory,
>>> I admire scholars, some who maybe in this thread who have used these
>>> theoretical lenses in their work in trying to understand mental development
>>> it the global context. I think Cultural Historical Activity Theory maybe
>>> one of the appropriate tools to explain that which concerns Lindsay; how
>>> Critical theory is finding its way of infiltrating critical spaces in
>>> communities, including academia, which he sees as nothing but “Grievance
>>> Studies” and threatening scientific thinking.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It has been good partaking in these conversations. I think reflections
>>> can continue to happen in private at a personal level and in smaller
>>> groups. What is important is; yes need to reflect on our thinking and our
>>> learning. I myself have learned a lot from this thread, in conscious and
>>> unconscious ways I transform as I read your contributions, to the point I
>>> at times pleasantly surprise myself quoting what was said in this thread.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> S’ma
>>>
>>> *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>> *On Behalf Of *Annalisa Aguilar
>>> *Sent:* Friday, 26 June 2020 22:37
>>> *To:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: Your views on a question.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hello S'ma and venerable others,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I was intrigued by this notion of Critical Theory being posed as a
>>> "grievance science," as if taking on a maudlin cape of "victim mentality"
>>> around the shoulders, etc.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It seems something of a cop-out to reduce it to that. It is almost as
>>> grievous as Holocaust deniers.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Still, to consider it analytically, Critical Theory by design is
>>> intended to uncover the ideologies by which certain social sciences have
>>> been taught and promulgated. It's de-constructive, right? This stance might
>>> be seen as nihilistic, but there has been some valuable work from stripping
>>> off the veneer of power structures in order to analyze its underlying
>>> logic, which in many cases has been arbitrary and reveals that privilege is
>>> usually not earned through merit.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> When considering relations of power, it's easy (albeit insensitive) for
>>> someone of privilege to name the powerless as "victims," but when this is
>>> done, it is only in an objection when victims call themselves victims, as
>>> if they have no right to do so.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> So who has the right to use this word "victim"?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I feel there is a strange aura about the word that is likened to the
>>> word "masochistic" and it's *that baggage* I am wrangling with in my post
>>> here.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Must there be prejudice cast upon those who are actual and legitimate
>>> victims. There seems intertwined in the meaning of the word something
>>> unquantifiable but that does result in "blaming the victim" dynamics, and
>>> even more insidious, gaslighting, and these have results of its own harmful
>>> effects. (Like when we say "to add insult to injury").
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Can no one use the word "victim" anymore?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Frequently people use the word "survivor," which does have connotations
>>> of resilience and fortitude against odds (of being victimized). But when we
>>> consider the word "survivor" when used as the name of a reality game show
>>> (in the early naughts). where people choose to put themselves in difficult
>>> circumstances on deserted islands to overcome these circumstances by their
>>> wits, to then be "voted off the island" by the other "survivors." Talk
>>> about social Darwinism!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I feel there is still something the word "survivor" leaves unspoken
>>> about the representation of a person who has been a target of prejudice,
>>> crime, neglect, or abuse, whether intentionally or not.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Curious, I looked up the definitions of "victim" and found these:
>>>
>>> 1. a person who suffers from a destructive or injurious action or
>>> agency: a victim of an automobile accident.
>>> 2. a person who is deceived or cheated, as by his or her own
>>> emotions or ignorance, by the dishonesty of others, or by some impersonal
>>> agency: a victim of misplaced confidence; the victim of a swindler; a
>>> victim of an optical illusion.
>>> 3. a person or animal sacrificed or regarded as sacrificed: war
>>> victims.
>>> 4. a living creature sacrificed in religious rites.
>>>
>>> When I look up synonyms for "victim" I find this:
>>>
>>> casualty, fatality, martyr, sufferer, butt, clown, dupe, fool, gambit,
>>> gopher, gudgeon, gull, hireling, immolation, innocent, mark, patsy, pawn,
>>> pigeon, prey, pushover, quarry, sacrifice, scapegoat, stooge, sucker,
>>> underdog, wretch, babe in woods, easy make, easy mark, hunted, injured
>>> party, sitting duck, sitting target, soft touch.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I did the same for the term survivor:
>>>
>>> 1. a person or thing that survives.
>>> 2. Law. the one of two or more designated persons, as joint tenants
>>> or others having a joint interest, who outlives the other or others.
>>> 3. a person who continues to function or prosper in spite of
>>> opposition, hardship, or setbacks.
>>>
>>> Synoymns:
>>>
>>> balance, debris, leftovers, legacy, oddments, remainder, remnant,
>>> remnants, residue, rest, scraps, surplus, trash, odds and ends, orts
>>>
>>> The third definition seems the lest frequent usage, or is it the most
>>> recent accepted meaning?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It is odd to consider victims as designated parties of sacrifice; and
>>> survivors to be considered mere leftovers.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Is it that the life energy of victims are like easily accessible
>>> batteries to be utilized for the benefit of those not sacrificed? Isn't
>>> that what criminals do? To appropriate the property or energy of others for
>>> their own unearned benefit and advancement?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Is that fitness or crime?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> t the same time to be a survivor seems to be something left less whole.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> What then would one call an individual or group who has been overpowered
>>> against their self-agency by another individual or group? Is there a word
>>> without these undertowing currents of meaning?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> We can say oppressed, but no one likes to say "I have been oppressed."
>>> or "I am oppressed," just as no one likes to say "I have been victimized,"
>>> "I am a victim," or "My society is victimized by your society," or "My
>>> ancestors were enslaved by yours."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> And yet, these would be factual pronouncements, were legitimate
>>> individuals (victims) of those actual experiences to describe themselves in
>>> this fashion.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Would it be no different than an individual saying, "I have been an
>>> oppressor." or "I oppress." No one likes to say "I victimize others," "I am
>>> a perpetrator," or "My society victimizes your society," or "My ancestors
>>> enslaved yours."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The problem in making these sorts of statements is that while factual
>>> and descriptive, they can actually be twisted into being prescriptive. As
>>> if to say, "I did this and I can do it again because that's who I am." or
>>> "This happened to me and it can happen again because that's who I am."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> While there are people such as this Lindsay (I did not watch the video),
>>> who can throw about "victimization" as if it were a shameful badge to wear,
>>> I don't see anyone of that camp using the same disdain to describe those
>>> who performed grave injustices against others, to perhaps utter a phrase
>>> like "perpetrator of injustices", that might invoke that same shadow of
>>> shame. To my estimation, whatever the words, it would be right and just
>>> they should provide that shadow of shame, given the injustices that
>>> Critical Theory is attempting to understand, without further empowering
>>> perpetrators and without further disempowering victims.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Is the reason for this blindspot or lapse because a crime performed in
>>> past cannot be adjusted to correct for the crime, that it somehow means
>>> justice cannot be performed? In a sort of "shrugged shoulders - c'est la
>>> vie" kind of attitude? That no one believes exhuming the "dead bodies" from
>>> "unmarked graves" worth the unpleasantness of the task?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Why is it easy to commit the crime, but so hard to bend the arc of
>>> justice to meet the crime?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In the days of the American Wild West, justice was doled out too
>>> quickly, but now it seems it is too slowly.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This is why I wonder how to consider science when we are talking about
>>> power structures. What is scientific about justice/injustice? Power seems
>>> unscientific. It is arbitrary. Or is it?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Were we to describe the cause and effect of such power structures and
>>> their internal reasoning, it would start to sound like Nazi propaganda, or
>>> the promotion of eugenics.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm reminded of a Bill Moyers interview I saw many years ago, the name
>>> of the guest I don't remember. I only recall he was a politico for the
>>> George W Bush campaign, and the fellow claimed his favorite book was
>>> Orwell's 1984, as if to say that it was an instruction booklet on how to
>>> create the kind of society he wanted. The blatant honesty was breathtaking.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Reading S'ma's post made me aware of how in the case of (all forms of)
>>> oppression it's rare for the oppressor to say, "I have some self-reflection
>>> to do to answer for the deeds of my ancestors, to make up for the
>>> injustices suffered by your ancestors," or "My sense of privilege allowed
>>> me to oppress you, and I don't feel right about that, so I will stop that
>>> now. I see the errors of my ways."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It feels there is no obligation for reconciliation because such folk
>>> percieve the cement of history has been poured and dried. "It's in the
>>> past, let's move on."
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> There is something absurd about the tacit agreement to avoid
>>> self-naming, and I'm trying to sort out how it might be not to be so absurd
>>> sounding.
>>>
>>> Has anyone a hand up to provide me on this reflection?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm not sure I'm articulating this very well, but that is my best
>>> attempt. Forgive any flaws in my reasoning, and of course the typos there
>>> above.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>>
>>> Annalisa
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>> on behalf of Simangele Mayisela <simangele.mayisela@wits.ac.za>
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, June 25, 2020 6:04 AM
>>> *To:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: Your views on a question.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> * [EXTERNAL]*
>>>
>>> Hi Andy and Alfredo
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you for responding to my communication, and for viewing the video
>>> I referred to in my previous email. Let me say that the connection between
>>> the current conversation about “scientific” knowledge (in this case in
>>> relation to “levels” of mental development and “ideology”) and James
>>> Lindsay’s argument on Critical Theory having no scientific basis (in the
>>> video) is this:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Lindsay and his colleagues believe that Critical Theory, I suppose with
>>> its shoots like Critical Race Theory, Critical Race Feminist theory,
>>> Identity Theories, etc. do not have a scientific base but are a movement
>>> which they call “Grievance studies”, that perpetuates “self-pity” and
>>> “victim mentality”. They further went on to produce fake scientific study
>>> “dog rape culture and feminism” known as “hoax science” as evidence of how
>>> unscientific “grievance studies” are; most of which are of course are
>>> situated in the social sciences. This further exposed the paucity in the
>>> system of peer reviews in scientific journals, which some believe are also
>>> tainted by ideological predispositions – my fear is that this introduces
>>> mistrust in the notion of review processes of scientific journals - which
>>> we have to be concerned about.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> The reason I brought up Lindsay’s argument to the picture is: while I am
>>> not certain if I wholly agree with Lindsay’s argument on Critical Theories,
>>> I am however fascinated by the fact that they confirm the influence of
>>> ideological position an individual or rather a “scientist” holds, ( an
>>> idea alluded to by some, earlier in this thread). I believe, as much as we
>>> aspire to be objective in our pursuit of scientific enquiry, the narratives
>>> associated with our scientific knowledge(s) are likely to be tainted with
>>> ideologically biases or historicity. The likes of Lindsay and Weinstein
>>> bring to our attention the dangers of the exclusion of the masses in the
>>> name of “scientific evidence” – who in this day of rapid technological
>>> connection the collective is gradually become global rather than in
>>> specific localities. Even those that deemed to have “primitive mental
>>> functioning” or “unsophisticated” mental functioning, their unexpected
>>> ability to infiltrate academia and other spaces with Critical Theory like
>>> a “Trojan Horse”, that’s according to Bret Weinstein (
>>> po.nl/2020/06/20/must-watch-joe-rogan-with-bret-weinstein-critical-theory-is-basically-a-trojan-horse/
>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__http*3A*2F*2Fpo.nl*2F2020*2F06*2F20*2Fmust-watch-joe-rogan-with-bret-weinstein-critical-theory-is-basically-a-trojan-horse*2F__*3B!!Mih3wA!QCD7ed0aCRAAlp7GdBrl0meYtbgs9bxM8e7Zg-RtwtTHcq2MHVUupotmjSed87zhqcRqSA*24&data=02*7C01*7Cdkirsh*40lsu.edu*7C793f465e2c064597a6ec08d81d52307d*7C2d4dad3f50ae47d983a09ae2b1f466f8*7C0*7C0*7C637291586126480974&sdata=OgkwRQ102d*2BW*2FUntR5jqwUD44OozPBxwZ495zg7NrtI*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!Mih3wA!WBb97M0rnCTuW6rx_rhYvkAPQLCK1TlHV1j2_71whs8hUwhp1NiF5m7opU1Tv5As5j44Bw$>
>>> ) seems to surprise us. I wonder though, if Critical Theorists' Trojan
>>> Horse is scientific evidence of “self-pity”, “victim mentality”,
>>> unsophisticated mental functioning, … (we can add other classifying
>>> adjectives to describe all those who have not developed “scientific
>>> tools”).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> My reference to Lindsay and Marxism, is related to some of the sources
>>> that I have encountered earlier, clearly not on this YouTube video I
>>> referred you to, but it is within this line of debates about “scientific”
>>> knowledge”.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It seems to me that the association of Paulo Freire’s “Education for
>>> the Oppressed” to "victim mentality" is kind of twisted and perhaps mistook
>>> for “Education for the Depressed”, which is unfortunate, especially if we
>>> take into consideration all the publications by Freire, like Education for
>>> Liberation. Nevertheless, the Trojan Horse analogy for the Critical
>>> Education is evidence of the collectively formulated knowledge that is
>>> generously shared, rendering the commodified "scientific" knowledge
>>> accessible to the privileged few, generously shared to all who needs to
>>> advance the survival of humanity.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Simangele
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> simangele.mayisela@wits.ac.za
>>>
>>> *From:* xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>> *On Behalf Of *Andy Blunden
>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, 24 June 2020 03:37
>>> *To:* xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu
>>> *Subject:* [Xmca-l] Re: Your views on a question.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Casting collective efforts at self-determination as "victim mentality"
>>> or "self pity" has long been a line of right-wing criticism of progressive
>>> movements. Of all people, Paulo Freire is the last to be guilty of such a
>>> sin though; his pedagogy is aimed specifically, like Myles Horton's, at
>>> stimulating and equipping people from being victims to self-determination.
>>> There is such a thing as a politics of pity though; it is called
>>> philanthropy and charity.
>>>
>>> Andy
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> *Andy Blunden*
>>> Hegel for Social Movements
>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2F*2Fnam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com*2F*3Furl*3Dhttps*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2Fbrill.com*2Fview*2Ftitle*2F54574__*3B!!Mih3wA!WCK45j6Y4AscTY1OVN1quxD0_VDKtR1Y9u5SYoUgfTIzhGpvyRCeU6XnFqBCRESHVrtCaw*24*26data*3D02*7C01*7Cdkirsh*40lsu.edu*7C3980c805ddde48ffcda308d81ce02bb5*7C2d4dad3f50ae47d983a09ae2b1f466f8*7C0*7C0*7C637291096420282275*26sdata*3DoX74*2BlINhl3MWMlwht3oCw5PTrjXyxOQX17*2BfVvxpf8*3D*26reserved*3D0__*3BJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!Mih3wA!XgF09Z_7Jf5M7eawhdePrcY6Ga6UVHH-Wen9Vq7UBXWfzeFgYdOg20ED5HIi0LW-P86LBA*24&data=02*7C01*7Cdkirsh*40lsu.edu*7C793f465e2c064597a6ec08d81d52307d*7C2d4dad3f50ae47d983a09ae2b1f466f8*7C0*7C0*7C637291586126480974&sdata=IkuUm91U9GMwiGxaDJXhs8w5QnwrCsBLNDtBPb0z6pA*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUqKioqKioqKioqKiolJSoqKioqKioqJSUqKiolJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!Mih3wA!WBb97M0rnCTuW6rx_rhYvkAPQLCK1TlHV1j2_71whs8hUwhp1NiF5m7opU1Tv5BzBwex0g$>
>>> Home Page
>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2F*2Fnam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com*2F*3Furl*3Dhttps*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2Fwww.ethicalpolitics.org*2Fablunden*2Findex.htm__*3B!!Mih3wA!WCK45j6Y4AscTY1OVN1quxD0_VDKtR1Y9u5SYoUgfTIzhGpvyRCeU6XnFqBCREQ2rLbDLg*24*26data*3D02*7C01*7Cdkirsh*40lsu.edu*7C3980c805ddde48ffcda308d81ce02bb5*7C2d4dad3f50ae47d983a09ae2b1f466f8*7C0*7C0*7C637291096420282275*26sdata*3D97yLyLrH0AJ5QXEU2RAXGWLVxXa6i54MPGgfam6vXFI*3D*26reserved*3D0__*3BJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSU!!Mih3wA!XgF09Z_7Jf5M7eawhdePrcY6Ga6UVHH-Wen9Vq7UBXWfzeFgYdOg20ED5HIi0LU90iyCdw*24&data=02*7C01*7Cdkirsh*40lsu.edu*7C793f465e2c064597a6ec08d81d52307d*7C2d4dad3f50ae47d983a09ae2b1f466f8*7C0*7C0*7C637291586126490969&sdata=NqHc8uV*2BR9b3*2BpgP4CeIG*2F8x8fTkOajO08luWCkeAzo*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUqKioqKioqKioqKiUlKioqKioqKiolJSolJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!Mih3wA!WBb97M0rnCTuW6rx_rhYvkAPQLCK1TlHV1j2_71whs8hUwhp1NiF5m7opU1Tv5Ck5wUnZA$>
>>>
>>> On 24/06/2020 9:11 am, Alfredo Jornet Gil wrote:
>>>
>>> thanks S’ma; among the many philosophy of science scholars who discuss
>>> what rigorous scientific and scholarship are or can be, your choice—a video
>>> critiquing critical theory in terms of what Lindsay refers to as “grievance
>>> studies”–is indeed surprising and remarkable in the context of this
>>> conversation!
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In the video, which did not so much touch my small Marxist me (I am not
>>> so well read so as to know how much of a Marxist I am!), Lindsay mentions
>>> Paolo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed as an example of “critical social
>>> justice” books, which he defines as “a codified way to indulge people into
>>> self pity…”(min. 47:50). He complains that teachers are being educated with
>>> Freire’s book, and that students are being taught with this critical (or,
>>> as Lindsay’s says, this self-pity) attitude. Without going into whether
>>> Lindsay’s critique holds or has any touch with what critical theory
>>> scholars argue and do, I wonder, what would be, from Lindsay’s position, an
>>> example of a good book for teachers, and why would that one be it?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Alfredo
>>>
>>> *From: *<xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>> <xmca-l-bounces@mailman.ucsd.edu> on behalf of Martin Packer
>>> <mpacker@cantab.net> <mpacker@cantab.net>
>>> *Reply to: *"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>> <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>> *Date: *Tuesday, 23 June 2020 at 23:54
>>> *To: *"eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity" <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>> <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>> *Subject: *[Xmca-l] Re: Your views on a question.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Simangele,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> How are you evaluating “level of mental functioning”? I would say that
>>> is something with which psychology has had some difficulty.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Martin
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *"I may say that whenever I meet Mrs. Seligman or Dr. Lowie or discuss
>>> matters with Radcliffe-Brown or Kroeber, I become at once aware that my
>>> partner does not understand anything in the matter, and I end usually with
>>> the feeling that this also applies to myself” (Malinowski, 1930)*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jun 23, 2020, at 4:32 PM, Simangele Mayisela <
>>> simangele.mayisela@wits.ac.za> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Further, I still have more questions, however it does appear to me that
>>> at the heart of the “hypothesis” of the scientific question are the
>>> “levels” of mental development which are associated to “skin colour”, with
>>> little consideration of the historical oppression that created the
>>> “backwards” economies that keep the third of the global population is what
>>> appears to be of low level of mental functioning. The question is more
>>> about “what is the quality of the contents of what is embodies by the black
>>> skin or a white skin?” with the aim to find evidence for the difference.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Just to share, lately have been viewing James Lindsay argument on what
>>> is “scientific”, “rigorous scientific” and “scholarship” vs popular
>>> narratives that are a propaganda based on Critical Theory, which are taking
>>> over academy. Here is one his videos that you may want to view – if you are
>>> Marxist at heart be warned that you may be challenged by Lindsay’s argument
>>> on ideologies.
>>>
>>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8N55gFjg4yg__;!!Mih3wA!U1fvp9wYVAl9tljWqr4zvO8FdaHI0Za42Z3RRQtNjbJa3mUTny0MXMlHBkW9Zbqu4dIqFw$
>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2F*2Fnam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com*2F*3Furl*3Dhttps*3A*2F*2Furldefense.com*2Fv3*2F__https*3A*2Fwww.youtube.com*2Fwatch*3Fv*3D8N55gFjg4yg__*3B!!Mih3wA!V2LYI2I2g-qSP--eE84G38eGWBud9YwatVDWX1IvY27YgsR7kTdkqVGDNoLNCYNmswIv-Q*24*26data*3D02*7C01*7Cdkirsh*40lsu.edu*7C3980c805ddde48ffcda308d81ce02bb5*7C2d4dad3f50ae47d983a09ae2b1f466f8*7C0*7C0*7C637291096420292271*26sdata*3DtYB881hofx2qlKcYHVaGFLwJWbzpFnRD8oRsTDV1y3U*3D*26reserved*3D0__*3BJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUl!!Mih3wA!XgF09Z_7Jf5M7eawhdePrcY6Ga6UVHH-Wen9Vq7UBXWfzeFgYdOg20ED5HIi0LWZEZpvXQ*24&data=02*7C01*7Cdkirsh*40lsu.edu*7C793f465e2c064597a6ec08d81d52307d*7C2d4dad3f50ae47d983a09ae2b1f466f8*7C0*7C0*7C637291586126490969&sdata=QtplwvBnPbeO8pEDjpsqP1r5VP8rKbh4hV6gmpYUbDE*3D&reserved=0__;JSUlJSUlJSUlJSUqKioqKioqKioqKiolJSoqKioqKioqJSUqJSUlJSUlJSUlJSUlJQ!!Mih3wA!WBb97M0rnCTuW6rx_rhYvkAPQLCK1TlHV1j2_71whs8hUwhp1NiF5m7opU1Tv5Aaswj01g$>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> S’ma
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Simangele Mayisela
>>> *Sent:* Tuesday, 23 June 2020 22:10
>>> *To:* eXtended Mind, Culture, Activity <xmca-l@mailman.ucsd.edu>
>>> *Subject:* RE: [Xmca-l] Re: Your views on a question.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear Alfredo
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you for taking my attention of “level” which is crucial to
>>> rendering the question “scientific”. But couple with level, which could be
>>> quantifies as “high” and “low” or “superior” or “inferior” would account
>>> for “difference”. As much as the question to be asked should be about the
>>> “ideological basis” , I think the “hypothesis” is likely to be linked to
>>> the “ideolody” as the hypothesis serves as springboard from which the
>>> scientist works from, which informs where the person will land in terms
>>> of the ideas.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Nevertheless thank you for the clarification. I see what you mean ?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> S’ma
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>
>> Crush human humanity out of shape once more, under similar hammers, and
>> it will twist itself into the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of
>> rapacious license and oppression over again, and it will surely yield the
>> same fruit, according to its kind. C.Dickens.
>> ---------------------------------------------------
>> Cultural Praxis Website: https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://culturalpraxis.net__;!!Mih3wA!U1fvp9wYVAl9tljWqr4zvO8FdaHI0Za42Z3RRQtNjbJa3mUTny0MXMlHBkW9ZboPHnQkpg$
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://culturalpraxis.net__;!!Mih3wA!Q_q_DNhDoq1Xzty8Vz0Wuuux1nL8ULgJJJ2-vL13YzNjFRpGelADB-JXAxMUbAotW_H_mw$>
>> Re-generating CHAT Website: re-generatingchat.com
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://re-generatingchat.com__;!!Mih3wA!Q_q_DNhDoq1Xzty8Vz0Wuuux1nL8ULgJJJ2-vL13YzNjFRpGelADB-JXAxMUbAoOrejabA$>
>> Archival resources website: lchc.ucsd.edu.
>> Narrative history of LCHC: lchcautobio.ucsd.edu.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
>
> Crush human humanity out of shape once more, under similar hammers, and it
> will twist itself into the same tortured forms. Sow the same seed of
> rapacious license and oppression over again, and it will surely yield the
> same fruit, according to its kind. C.Dickens.
> ---------------------------------------------------
> Cultural Praxis Website: https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://culturalpraxis.net__;!!Mih3wA!U1fvp9wYVAl9tljWqr4zvO8FdaHI0Za42Z3RRQtNjbJa3mUTny0MXMlHBkW9ZboPHnQkpg$
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://culturalpraxis.net__;!!Mih3wA!V-mYNb3iJ4MF7rB0hejs8XZr-x47zmuly5qtpqPQPH_4pacZ-MyCn3K8BNOiCivThQbJOQ$>
> Re-generating CHAT Website: re-generatingchat.com
> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://re-generatingchat.com__;!!Mih3wA!V-mYNb3iJ4MF7rB0hejs8XZr-x47zmuly5qtpqPQPH_4pacZ-MyCn3K8BNOiCiv56BzdDQ$>
> Archival resources website: lchc.ucsd.edu.
> Narrative history of LCHC: lchcautobio.ucsd.edu.
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.ucsd.edu/pipermail/xmca-l/attachments/20200701/fd07da56/attachment.html
More information about the xmca-l
mailing list