truth, meaning, arbitrariness, and power....

Gary Shank (P30GDS1 who-is-at MVS.CSO.NIU.EDU)
Fri, 19 Jan 96 09:47 CST

While I am on it, I'd like to see if I can pull my last remarks
on truth and meaning into the arbitrariness discussion:

As I see it, sometimes a state of affairs precedes a claim, and
when this is the case, the truth of the claim is based at least
in part on the state of affairs. The state of affairs that
'cyanide has a lethal effect on most humans when administered in
dosage x' precedes and grounds the claim that 'taking cyanide
will most likely kill you' and the meaning of that claim is
grounded most definitely in that prior state of affairs. In cases
like this, there is nothing arbitrary about assigning the label
of 'poison' to cyanide.
Arbitrariness arises when some prior claim, usually but not always
held as an assumption, and often then as an unstated or unreflected
assumption, is the basis for a state of affairs. For example, the
claim 'girls cant do math' serves as the basis for a state of
affairs in schools where girls are called on less often, shunted
to basic math classes, etc. In this case, the state of affairs of
math discrimination against girls is based on nothing more than
a claim that has ists strength more as a claim than as a reflection
of some prior state of affairs. That is, when we try to look for
other reasons for the fact that girls cannot do math, other than
the claim 'girls cant do math' we dont find anything.
To summarize: arbitrariness occurs when we have a procedure based
on a claim that has no basis itself in some state of affairs. One
of the roles we need to perform as researchers is to identify and
ferret out and challenge such claims, and to invalidate them due
to the lack of any grounding in some prior state of affairs. But
we also need to respect those claims which are grounded in prior
states of affairs, at least to the extent that we can understand
and agree upon that grounding.
the alternative, to insist that the claim 'girls cant do math'
is a raw and blatant exercise of power, and can only be challenged
by the exercise of a greater amount of power, seems to be just-
ified only as a court of last resort, and not as a matter of bus-
iness as usual. Our culture is much too mean as it is, without
further valorization of power and its immediate and indiscriminant
use....
gary shank
gshank who-is-at niu.edu