Florida's rejection of math textbooks "due" to CRT

[Wahoo Redux]

I wonder...

Would it work if we just pretend there are no black, brown, yellow, or beige people, and never have been?

Then the pinkish-white folks wouldn't have to feel bad, or anything...

M.

Are the pinkish-white folks supposed to feel bad?

[Wahoo Redux]

I wonder...

Would it work if we just pretend there are no black, brown, yellow, or beige people, and never have been?

Then the pinkish-white folks wouldn't have to feel bad, or anything...

M.

And then the black, brown, yellow and beige people could just accept that they are not the normal standard and learn to live with it and stop complaining.

Seems to me that a great many pinkish-white people don't want the normal standard to be the norm but would rather that we are all accepted and acknowledged for who we are.

[Wahoo Redux]

Hmmmmm...seems to me these comments by good people who care are exactly what I was talking about earlier----the whole "sins of the father" deal.

We do morph quickly into ad hom when this subject comes up, or the thread just completely shuts down.

[marshwiggle]

Hmmmmm...seems to me these comments by good people who care are exactly what I was talking about earlier----the whole "sins of the father" deal.

We do morph quickly into ad hom when this subject comes up, or the thread just completely shuts down.

I think there are some who believe the only real way to motivate people to "do the right thing" is to make them feel horribly guilty. The idea that people may be motivated to do good things by their moral principles alone, without all kinds of emotional baggage, is foreign.

I don't see it as surprising that many people want to improve bad schools, and crime-ridden neighborhoods just because that's the kind of society they want to live in, rather than because someone else is trying to blame them for the status quo. But clearly not everyone sees it that way.

[mamselle]

Yesterday in Buffalo, NY:

   https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/buffalo-supermarket-mass-shooting-leaves-7-dead-law-enforcement-source-rcna28883

GRT, not CRT, is what we should be outlawing...

M.

[mamselle]

Hmmmmm...seems to me these comments by good people who care are exactly what I was talking about earlier----the whole "sins of the father" deal.

We do morph quickly into ad hom when this subject comes up, or the thread just completely shuts down.

I think there are some who believe the only real way to motivate people to "do the right thing" is to make them feel horribly guilty. The idea that people may be motivated to do good things by their moral principles alone, without all kinds of emotional baggage, is foreign.

I don't see it as surprising that many people want to improve bad schools, and crime-ridden neighborhoods just because that's the kind of society they want to live in, rather than because someone else is trying to blame them for the status quo. But clearly not everyone sees it that way.

Well, in moral theology, one idea is that an admission of guilt (sometimes referred to as a sense of conviction) is a necessary precursor to the amendment of life.

So....if anyone's feeling guilty, and acknowledging it, that's a potentially hopeful sign....

M.

[marshwiggle]

Hmmmmm...seems to me these comments by good people who care are exactly what I was talking about earlier----the whole "sins of the father" deal.

We do morph quickly into ad hom when this subject comes up, or the thread just completely shuts down.

I think there are some who believe the only real way to motivate people to "do the right thing" is to make them feel horribly guilty. The idea that people may be motivated to do good things by their moral principles alone, without all kinds of emotional baggage, is foreign.

I don't see it as surprising that many people want to improve bad schools, and crime-ridden neighborhoods just because that's the kind of society they want to live in, rather than because someone else is trying to blame them for the status quo. But clearly not everyone sees it that way.

Well, in moral theology, one idea is that an admission of guilt (sometimes referred to as a sense of conviction) is a necessary precursor to the amendment of life.

So....if anyone's feeling guilty, and acknowledging it, that's a potentially hopeful sign....

M.

If it's real guilt, then that's true. However, if it's "pseudo-guilt", it's not.

The very fact that people are so willing to publicly "admit guilt" is a sign that it's not real. Anyone who has done something for which they genuinely feel ashamed hates to admit it, even to themselves, and if they must make an apology, want it to be as private as possible. Justin Trudeau crying on camera and "apologizing" for actions decades ago is in sharp contrast to how he responds to negative consequences of actions of his own or his own government,  for which he is loathe to admit any remorse. (Any negative consequences of his own actions are somehow not his fault.)



"The true test of a man's character is what he does when no one is watching." -John Wooden

A corollary might be
"The least reliable sign of a person's character is what they do in public, especially when they're being explicitly observed."

[Parasaurolophus]

The very fact that people are so willing to publicly "admit guilt" is a sign that it's not real. Anyone who has done something for which they genuinely feel ashamed hates to admit it, even to themselves, and if they must make an apology, want it to be as private as possible.

This intuition of yours is an empirical claim, and stands in need of actual empirical evidence. While it's plausible, my intuitions tell me differently. In particular, I used to have the similar intuition that people didn't knowingly do or want bad things, at least not on a wide scale. The last six years, with their imperative of "triggering the l1Bz"have sorely disabused me of that notion.

But while we're at it, let's not conflate individual behaviour and motivations with institutional behaviours, motivations, and imperatives.

[Wahoo Redux]

Hmmmmm...seems to me these comments by good people who care are exactly what I was talking about earlier----the whole "sins of the father" deal.

We do morph quickly into ad hom when this subject comes up, or the thread just completely shuts down.

I think there are some who believe the only real way to motivate people to "do the right thing" is to make them feel horribly guilty. The idea that people may be motivated to do good things by their moral principles alone, without all kinds of emotional baggage, is foreign.

I don't see it as surprising that many people want to improve bad schools, and crime-ridden neighborhoods just because that's the kind of society they want to live in, rather than because someone else is trying to blame them for the status quo. But clearly not everyone sees it that way.

Well, in moral theology, one idea is that an admission of guilt (sometimes referred to as a sense of conviction) is a necessary precursor to the amendment of life.

So....if anyone's feeling guilty, and acknowledging it, that's a potentially hopeful sign....

M.

I have three objections to this idea.

The first is the aforementioned idea that I or anyone living should feel "guilty."  I did not do these things from the past.  Why should I or anyone "acknowledge" "guilt?"  Teach the history in all its awfulness but don't blame the people who were not there.  I am simply not "guilty" of the atrocities from the past.

As a purely practical objection, this approach to "guilt" is alienating the people you want to change.  I emphatically DO NOT see a "potentially hopeful sign" anywhere on race relations.  In fact, I think the last decade has shown a tremendous backsliding.  Trump did not come out of nowhere.  He is part of a backlash on many fronts, part of which is this "white guilt" topos. 

What is "the right thing" in this instance?

And finally, this culture of shaming encourages ideologues to attack their allies.  The Bright Ages Twitter ridiculousness is a perfect example: two white scholars attempt to write a multi-cultural, culturally sensitive revision of the middle ages...but they do not quite state things in terms that are acceptable to someone like Rambaran-Olm, and thus they are attacked.  It is cowardly of Rambaran-Olm to assault fellow academics (who she knows will react) but leave the Trump rallies alone (where she knows her views will be risible or incendiary), and in turn Rambaran-Olm is roundly roasted by academics and non-academics alike. 

So, while I generally bow to your wisdom in most things, mamselle, I am unconvinced in this case.  I do not think the system of guilting (white) people is legitimate or effective.

I do sometimes wonder if the perspective of people who came into adulthood in the 70s and 80s is predicated upon this kind of confrontational, you-must-acknowledge-the-sins-of-the-past ethos.

[marshwiggle]

Hmmmmm...seems to me these comments by good people who care are exactly what I was talking about earlier----the whole "sins of the father" deal.

We do morph quickly into ad hom when this subject comes up, or the thread just completely shuts down.

I think there are some who believe the only real way to motivate people to "do the right thing" is to make them feel horribly guilty. The idea that people may be motivated to do good things by their moral principles alone, without all kinds of emotional baggage, is foreign.

I don't see it as surprising that many people want to improve bad schools, and crime-ridden neighborhoods just because that's the kind of society they want to live in, rather than because someone else is trying to blame them for the status quo. But clearly not everyone sees it that way.

Well, in moral theology, one idea is that an admission of guilt (sometimes referred to as a sense of conviction) is a necessary precursor to the amendment of life.

So....if anyone's feeling guilty, and acknowledging it, that's a potentially hopeful sign....

M.

I have three objections to this idea.

The first is the aforementioned idea that I or anyone living should feel "guilty."  I did not do these things from the past.  Why should I or anyone "acknowledge" "guilt?"  Teach the history in all its awfulness but don't blame the people who were not there.  I am simply not "guilty" of the atrocities from the past.

As a purely practical objection, this approach to "guilt" is alienating the people you want to change.  I emphatically DO NOT see a "potentially hopeful sign" anywhere on race relations.  In fact, I think the last decade has shown a tremendous backsliding.  Trump did not come out of nowhere.  He is part of a backlash on many fronts, part of which is this "white guilt" topos. 

What is "the right thing" in this instance?

And finally, this culture of shaming encourages ideologues to attack their allies.  The Bright Ages Twitter ridiculousness is a perfect example: two white scholars attempt to write a multi-cultural, culturally sensitive revision of the middle ages...but they do not quite state things in terms that are acceptable to someone like Rambaran-Olm, and thus they are attacked.  It is cowardly of Rambaran-Olm to assault fellow academics (who she knows will react) but leave the Trump rallies alone (where she knows her views will be risible or incendiary), and in turn Rambaran-Olm is roundly roasted by academics and non-academics alike. 

So, while I generally bow to your wisdom in most things, mamselle, I am unconvinced in this case.  I do not think the system of guilting (white) people is legitimate or effective.

Well said.

Along these lines, I'm probably like a lot of people in that I'm happy to volunteer and help with all kinds of organizations, and I don't want or need any special recognition for my contributions, but I'm NOT motivated to invest myself with any organization that requires me to wallow in guilt to do so.

[mamselle]

There's a difference acknowledged in confessional training between "feeling guilty," which may be fact- or neurosis-based, and "being guilty," which is based on acknowledged, evidentiary proof.

The confessor often works with the former--whose feelings are very real to them, but may be rooted in some past trauma for which they were not actually responsible--to help them find a qualified therapist who can help them sort the causal issues out and find healing for themselves.

The confessor works with the latter to work through the sequence of admission, acceptance of responsibility,  any  attendant issues of forgiveness (including forgiveness of themselves), penance, and intentional change (amendment of life.).

Sometimes "feeling guilty" is tied to "being guilty,;" sometimes they're different.

But the careful confessor/spiritual director works through all those points very specifically, precisely because causality may or may not be tied to chronology and/or actual capability or culpability.

It's not a careless process.

M.

[Diogenes]

There's no reason that anyone who immigrated (or whose parents immigrated) within the past 60 years should either, for the same reason.

Slavery was rampant in the Caribbean. Not to mention that's where Columbus first landed and started the genocide.

[Wahoo Redux]

There's a difference acknowledged in confessional training between "feeling guilty," which may be fact- or neurosis-based, and "being guilty," which is based on acknowledged, evidentiary proof.

The confessor often works with the former--whose feelings are very real to them, but may be rooted in some past trauma for which they were not actually responsible--to help them find a qualified therapist who can help them sort the causal issues out and find healing for themselves.

The confessor works with the latter to work through the sequence of admission, acceptance of responsibility,  any  attendant issues of forgiveness (including forgiveness of themselves), penance, and intentional change (amendment of life.).

Sometimes "feeling guilty" is tied to "being guilty,;" sometimes they're different.

But the careful confessor/spiritual director works through all those points very specifically, precisely because causality may or may not be tied to chronology and/or actual capability or culpability.

It's not a careless process.

M.

I'm sorry, mamselle, but I am missing the point of your analogy here.  It is probably my obtuseness. 

Are you saying that we contemporary pinkish-white people (which is an excellent description of my complexion, actually) need to work through our own culpability to, in this case, acknowledge unspecified evidence of historical wrongdoing? 

[jimbogumbo]

I can admit their was much that we should regret as a nation. I must say, I am unaware of any organizations that are trying to force me into wallowing in guilt.

The organization I think I loathe  most in the US is the NRA.

I will now go back to my national park hiking. Just finished Mount Rainier and Olympic. Planning on six to eight more this year.

[dismalist]

I can admit their was much that we should regret as a nation.

Such as ending slavery, at great cost, including, but not limited to, death on the battlefield, to non-slave owners.