LV426 (06-24-2021), Phantasmal (06-23-2021)
Okay, once more for the cheap seats:
I DIDN'T ASK FOR A REPETITION OF YOUR SUPPOSITION AND CONJECTURE.....I ASKED FOR A DIRECT QUOTE FROM THE CRITICAL RACE THEORY PAPER THAT STATES IN NO UNCERTAIN TERMS THAT "...all education is political indoctrination" AS YOU CLAIM. EASY ENOUGH TO DO, AS THE AUTHOR'S ORIGINAL PAPERS ARE AVAILABLE ON LINE.
IF YOU CAN'T, THAT MAKES YOU A LIAR NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES AND WAYS YOUR REPEAT YOURSELF. GOEBBELS WOULD BE PROUD OF YOU.
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
LV426 (06-24-2021), Phantasmal (06-23-2021)
Critical Race Theory has become a label for EVERY SINGLE WHITE MAN'S GRIEVANCE. What they THINK it is and what it actually is are two completely different things.
LV426 (06-24-2021), Phantasmal (06-23-2021), Taichiliberal (06-23-2021), zappasguitar (06-24-2021)
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
LV426 (06-24-2021), Phantasmal (06-23-2021)
Crenshaw is an admitted Marxist, so naturally she bends over backwards to paint any and all social movements as such in origin. However, here from one of your own links is a caveat that I'm sure you missed, so I underscored and highlighted the following: ".... Some critical scholars adapt ideas drawn from Marxist and socialist theories to demonstrate how economic power relationships influence legal practices and consciousness. For others, the Frankfurt School of Critical Theory and its attention to the construction of cultural and psycho-social meanings are central to explaining how law uses mechanisms of denial and legitimation. Still others find resonance with postmodernist sensibilities and deconstruction, notably illustrated in literary and architectural works. Some scholars emphasize the importance of narratives and stories in devising critical alternatives to prevailing legal practices. Many critical legal scholars draw upon intellectual currents in literature, pop culture, social theory, history, and other fields to challenge the idea of the individual as a stable, coherent self, capable of universal reason and guided by general laws of nature. In contrast, argue critical scholars, individuals are constituted by complex and completing sources of ideology, social practice, and power relationships.
SO ONCE AGAIN, CAN YOU PRODUCE FROM THE ORIGINAL PAPERS THAT ORIGIN "CRITICAL RACE THEORY" THAT STATE AS YOU CLAIM THAT THEY ARE OF MARXIST ORIGIN, MUCH LESS CALLING EDUCATION "PROPAGANDA"? The reading audience awaits.
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
LV426 (06-24-2021), Phantasmal (06-23-2021)
Apropos to this thread, here's a little butt burner for those all bent out of shape about CRT:
Black Before Columbus Came: The African Discovery of America |
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
This amounts to no more than a litany of logical fallacies, variously:
Trivial objections (a subset of red herring arguments) also sometimes called logic chopping
Appeal to the stone
Argumentum ad baculum
Burden of proof
Continuum or line drawing
Essentially, your responses boil down to increasingly shrill demands for more and more proof to a point where it is obvious that no matter how much is presented it will never be enough. So, maybe at this point you should focus on discrediting the notion that it is Marxist with some evidence of your own rather than dismiss out-of-hand without counter evidence what I've presented then demand more evidence from me.
More of the same logical fallacies demanding ever more evidence. It is just an appeal to the stone. I could continue to provide more but it will never be enough to satisfy your requirements as you have already set your position in stone, hence the name of the fallacy.
So let's clarify for the reading audience:
YOU make a specific, declarative statement as to the content of a current theory's thesis.
I ask you to provide documented proof that validates said statement.
You DO NOT PROVIDE PROOF REQUESTED, but instead repeat your personal opinion, supposition and conjecture along with analysis/opinions of OTHER theories.
You make several accusations and claims that have no basis in reality of the chronology of the post, as clearly you do not understand or are in denial of the FACT that when YOU make an assertion, claim, statement, the burden of proof is on you when challenged.
To date you essentially blow smoke instead of answering a simple question. https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...63#post4499963 This would indicate that you cannot meet the challenge and therefore your claim is based on nothing more than your personal supposition and conjecture. To claim anything else is a lie. So continue repeating your dodge in various forms, as the man in your mirror is the only person buying it.
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
LV426 (06-24-2021), Phantasmal (06-23-2021)
I provided plenty of proof. You simply didn't like the level of specificity of what I provided and launched directly into a counterattack against me and that position without any sort of factual rebuttal.
Just because you don't like the answer doesn't make the answer wrong.
cancel2 2022 (06-23-2021)
Translation: T.A.Gardner cannot provide proof of his original assertion. He just blows smoke over and over, trying to assert critiques and essays on SIMILAR venues, but to date he cannot provide his assertion from the original thesis of CRT. https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...63#post4499963
So I leave T.A. to predictably parrot his self aggrandizing drivel and dodges....blind to his own folly as seen by the objective reader.
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
https://effectiviology.com/appeal-to...e...%20More%20As we saw above, the appeal to the stone involves dismissing an opposing argument, without sufficient justification. As such, when you recognize someone using this fallacy against you, the best course of action is to call the other person out, and ask them to support their dismissiveness, by justifying why they find your argument to be absurd.
For example, if someone dismisses your statement as ridiculous, you can say in response: “I understand that you think that, but can you explain why you think it’s absurd?”.
In some cases, you can provide further evidence in order to support your original argument. However, keep in mind that defending your own stance using additional evidence often doesn’t help in this situation, since the other person will likely be dismissive of such evidence, just as they were of the original argument.
Argumentum ad lapidem (Latin: “appeal to the stone”) is a logical fallacy that consists in dismissing a statement as absurd without giving proof of its absurdity.
https://cognitive-liberty.online/arg...-to-the-stone/Ad lapidem statements are fallacious because they fail to address the merits of the claim in dispute. The same applies to proof by assertion, where an unproved or disproved claim is asserted as true on no ground other than that of its truth having been asserted.
Here, Tachi says because I cannot or will not provide a specific, direct, quote that he alone demands my whole argument is absurd on its face. Nothing refuting it is provided. No counter facts, no counter reasoning, nothing. It is a pure appeal to the stone argument that he's making.
Would some adult in the vicinity please explain to this fool that no matter how many OPINION PIECES, PARALLEL SUBJECT ANALYSIS he produces or definitions, he has YET to provide FROM THE AUTHOR OF THE THESIS ON CRITICAL RACE THEORY an exact quote as to what he previously claimed,https://www.justplainpolitics.com/sh...63#post4499963
T.A. just keeps proving my point over and over....MAGA hat wearers make poor propagandists.
Say goodnight Gracie.
During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.
George Orwell
Phantasmal (06-23-2021)
Or the division and separation of "groups" as he accused CRT of doing.
He got "separation and division into groups" from this: "Critical pedagogy, on the other hand, in its attention to social justice, the empowerment of disadvantaged groups, and the social and political context of learning..."
He said that "separated and divided people"....but doesn't say how.
When I die, turn me into a brick and use me to cave in the skull of a fascist
Taichiliberal (06-25-2021)
Bookmarks