I hear you, but you also present your arguments in a tangential manner. Firstly, there is nothing inherently wrong with being conscious about race. Being mindful of how someone's life could be impacted by race and racism is a sign of attending to health. However, it is wrong when we ascribe stereotypes and value to others based on their …
I hear you, but you also present your arguments in a tangential manner. Firstly, there is nothing inherently wrong with being conscious about race. Being mindful of how someone's life could be impacted by race and racism is a sign of attending to health. However, it is wrong when we ascribe stereotypes and value to others based on their identities without them affirming or ascribing to it themselves.
Secondly, noting the demographics behind the early thinkers of the Enlightenment is bringing attention to context. Rationalism and objectivity were values to break away from religious indoctrination, and it must be said that those screaming this loudly were white men. Rationalism implied that those who believed in religion were irrational (a gross simplification, but rang true for many early mental health thinkers like Freud and Ellis). That is a fact. It's not assuming that people of color (PoC) did/do not have these values, nor should it imply such. It is simply naming that these values did not become large through PoC sharing their beliefs in these values.
Lastly, your argument against lived experience because of subjectivity is also contradictory. By learning about people and truly honoring people's humanity, we avoid mischaracterization and leaning on stereotypes. You imply that humans can be objective and I simply push back that we cannot be that way, because of horrors like the 1930s. In the same way you argue that Germany was being subjective backed by power, they in fact were actually claiming to be objective through eugenics. Heck much of our statistical analyses come from eugenicists in the name of modernity. Claiming that humans could reach objectivity actually led to the Holocaust
Lord mercy. Through the prism of ethnicity, specifically noting white medical professionals, with no thought to that providing benefits to Koreans who were assisted via missionaries and other doctors that provided their services without regard to their ethnicity in the early 1900’s.
I better add that Japan’s society benefited from the aforementioned enlightenment, and the African(Asian) continent. Nary a peep of ones ethnicity and grievance over so-called colonialism’s harmfulness. Only in the US with self absorbed, looking for any excuse to justify neo-Marxist ideology and belief adherence.
I hear you, but you also present your arguments in a tangential manner. Firstly, there is nothing inherently wrong with being conscious about race. Being mindful of how someone's life could be impacted by race and racism is a sign of attending to health. However, it is wrong when we ascribe stereotypes and value to others based on their identities without them affirming or ascribing to it themselves.
Secondly, noting the demographics behind the early thinkers of the Enlightenment is bringing attention to context. Rationalism and objectivity were values to break away from religious indoctrination, and it must be said that those screaming this loudly were white men. Rationalism implied that those who believed in religion were irrational (a gross simplification, but rang true for many early mental health thinkers like Freud and Ellis). That is a fact. It's not assuming that people of color (PoC) did/do not have these values, nor should it imply such. It is simply naming that these values did not become large through PoC sharing their beliefs in these values.
Lastly, your argument against lived experience because of subjectivity is also contradictory. By learning about people and truly honoring people's humanity, we avoid mischaracterization and leaning on stereotypes. You imply that humans can be objective and I simply push back that we cannot be that way, because of horrors like the 1930s. In the same way you argue that Germany was being subjective backed by power, they in fact were actually claiming to be objective through eugenics. Heck much of our statistical analyses come from eugenicists in the name of modernity. Claiming that humans could reach objectivity actually led to the Holocaust
Lord mercy. Through the prism of ethnicity, specifically noting white medical professionals, with no thought to that providing benefits to Koreans who were assisted via missionaries and other doctors that provided their services without regard to their ethnicity in the early 1900’s.
I better add that Japan’s society benefited from the aforementioned enlightenment, and the African(Asian) continent. Nary a peep of ones ethnicity and grievance over so-called colonialism’s harmfulness. Only in the US with self absorbed, looking for any excuse to justify neo-Marxist ideology and belief adherence.
Thomas Aquinas would like a word.
Your point? Also, is that your only takeaway from everything I said? In other words, you have no rebuttal?