My deputy did her masters at Soas. She said most of the professors and lecturers are Middle Eastern or Asian and she only remembered one white bloke. Wasn't a bastion of neo-colonialism in her non-white British view.
Has political correctness actually gone mad?
- Thread starter Pogue Mahone
- Start date
A Discomfiting Question: Was The Chicago Torture Case Racism?
http://www.npr.org/sections/codeswi...-question-was-the-chicago-torture-case-racism
http://www.npr.org/sections/codeswi...-question-was-the-chicago-torture-case-racism
The fact they aren't sure or are afraid to call that hate crime is a joke
These are thorny ones tbf. Whip the right wing press up good.
Troubled teens.
Yeah I can imagine that to be the case.
7 is trivial, no serious study of any text neglects the context in which it was written. I can understand 6 to a point, but there are no real argument as to why it is better to ignore Europeans rather than Asians. Perhaps especially ethics and political philosophy are the most relevant sub-fields.
On topics such as the Philosophy of Science, I do believe you miss out on critical components by omitting the modern European philosophers. Which is considered to be an essential part of learning how to learn. How can you seriously consider a University degree which fails to study the definition and discussion of what knowledge means?
Modern philosophers (and scientists) are intertwined anyways, you can't read only Asian or American papers. They cite each other, thus become prerequisites.
Which is probably why you'd go to SOAS in fairness.
But, again, they can do that. That option is available to them, at just about any other academic institution in the country. We are talking about students who, when they filled out their UCAS forms, decided against going to Manchester, Exeter, Durham or Oxford Brookes, where a more balanced / rounded / complete / traditional /white oppressive (however you prefer to think of it) syllabus was on offer. Instead they decided to go to SOAS. SOAS, which says, all over its literature, that it has a focus on Africa and Asia.
I am struggling to see what is controversial about this.
Yeah, this.
Anecdotally the 'History of Art' course here decided to rebrand itself as 'World Art' and offer a more international flavour. It saw its applications halve and had to revert to History of Art. Students, and undergraduate ones in particular, want the classics. Typically they want their Nietzsche, Socrates and Plato so if these students have signed up on a course at SOAS that specifically offers them something different thats fair enough.
They should be entitled to expect something different, not the same thing that everyone else is offering with a token nod to Africa or Asia; if SOAS is promising to fill (what in reality) is a very niche, niche then they should be held to task if they're not managing it.
Last edited:
They're not going to do that though. Even if they acquiesce completely to all of these requests and ensure that "the majority of the philosophers on our courses are from the Global South or it’s diaspora" that still leaves them with scope to study a bunch of white philosophers too. Which is obviously going to include the likes of Plato, Nietzche and Socrates.
To me, 7 is the silliest request. Anyone learning about anything in university should always do so "from a critical standpoint". Learning how to do this is the whole point of third-level education, as opposed to the rote learning they did in secondary school. You're not supposed to accept any opinion from anyone without trying to look for flaws and context. Bit of a worry that someone so senior in the student body at this university doesn't seem aware of this.
Who stole everything they pretended to think up for themselves from people in Egypt in the first place, the racist twats.
Well, Plato and Socrates anyway. Not Nietzche, nothing questionable about him.
Well, Plato and Socrates anyway. Not Nietzche, nothing questionable about him.
South Wales pizza worker sacked for calling a grandmother an "ugly b***h"
'And after receiving a torrent of abuse, she says: "Oh go and shove your head in the pizza oven.'
http://www.southwales-eveningpost.c...0041891-detail/story.html#hsFsEQcVKRMS3gOt.99
'And after receiving a torrent of abuse, she says: "Oh go and shove your head in the pizza oven.'
http://www.southwales-eveningpost.c...0041891-detail/story.html#hsFsEQcVKRMS3gOt.99
Is this a political correctness issue?
Nope. Maybe wrong thread?
"Grandmother-of-26" and still in her early 60s. Blimey.
"Grandmother-of-26" and still in her early 60s. Blimey.
Ah, yeah sorry. Got distracted at work and thought I was still in the DM thread.
Can't even call old women ugly bitches anymore, this country is going to the dogs
Like 98.75% of so-called political correctness issues, this is a pure assholeness issue.
There are fundamental questions in every field of study, and regardless how much one dislikes the Europeans it is true that western philosophers have been the most influential in today's view on questions like:
- What does it mean that something is true?
- What does it mean that something is scientific?
- Is knowledge something attainable, or just an ideal?
- Is it possible to derive knowledge without observation? Solely from observation? How does one test a hypothesis?
etc.
Which means that at the bottom, as a foundation, of every field of study lies principles derived by western philosophers.
It is impossible to learn Physics without calculus. It is equally impossible to study quantitative social science from Africa or the Orient without reading and understanding why we believe it can be used to derive knowledge about the world.
You can of course disagree, but if you do it in an ignorant way you'll never understand the premise of what you are studying. Which cannot be considered as proper, since it creates a vast range of possible logical errors .
Ethics and political philosophy are different though. If they only mean those sub-fields, I can have some sympathy for the argument. Still, the human rights e.g. are derived from the Enlightenment period. The UN too. You're kind of forced to expose yourself to such an influential area regardless.
@donkeyfish the only thing I'd say is it's nothing to do with "not liking Europeans", it's about focusing on another part of the world. But I take the rest of your points, maybe it wouldn't be possible to ignore Europeans completely. As Pogue said, that wasn't being proposed anyway, it's just a greater weighting to African and Asian stuff.
Agree, a bad choice of words. I should have written prefer to study thinkers from other areas. The point is that there is almost no African and Asian stuff on the topic of Philosophy of Science (some exceptions of course, e.g. Arabic). In particular regarding the relevance of today.
Just have a look at who contributed to this field (not exhaustive list, contains the most influential), and realise out how difficult it is to put a lot of weight on non-Europeans:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_philosophers_of_science
Just have a look at who contributed to this field (not exhaustive list, contains the most influential), and realise out how difficult it is to put a lot of weight on non-Europeans:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_philosophers_of_science
It's an Orwellian vision of Britain under Corbyn.
Domino's left us waiting for over an hour once, and then most of the sides were missing. In the end we got two orders delivered, and far too much food. Although rocket as a pizza topping wasn't a plus on either occasion.
He probably should have been sacked for being a pillock. If customer service has failed, a company shouldn't call in a JCB to make the hole bigger.
The sides will always be a disappointment from Domino's. They won't do stuffed crusts on thin crust pizzas either. A beetle-filled home of abject disappointment that aims to add a touch of gloss to us closing our naff '70s curtains, home alone, waking half-drunk on the couch, flaccid penis in hand.
Dr. Sian Hawthorne at SOAS in the Department of Religions and Philosophies has put this issue to bed as far as Im concerned.
Absolutely nothing to argue with there. Does make you wonder about the alleged quote from the head of department published by the Mail. Wouldn't put it past them to have invented it.
Th p.c. will destroy this world
Yeah, Stewart Lee's precise language will be the end of us.
Yep. They've already transitioned from desktop to laptop, so you can only wonder what the next stage will be on their path to world domination. Worrying times.
Is it too politically incorrect to point out that the British man having a baby is actually just a woman dressed as a man?
I know these days you're supposed to subscribe to the progressive angle that gender is just a state of mind, but he was born a woman. It's not shocking in a the least that someone with female sex organs can conceive a baby, which is essentially what has happened, yet you're a transphobe if you don't go along with it.
Thought this was as good a place as any for this topic.
I know these days you're supposed to subscribe to the progressive angle that gender is just a state of mind, but he was born a woman. It's not shocking in a the least that someone with female sex organs can conceive a baby, which is essentially what has happened, yet you're a transphobe if you don't go along with it.
Thought this was as good a place as any for this topic.
This whole mindset gives me a headache.
I've also read that not wanting to date a trans-woman is transphobic (Well as a straight man i would have a problem with that). And that it's possible to have a penis and be a lesbian (i'm sure there are quite a few lesbians that would disagree with this sentiment). I also saw this the other day
http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-...nates-womens-cycling-event-in-historic-first/
The most concerning part from this article though:
I means FFS. That's a Pandoras box if i ever saw any. It's not sexist to point out that men have some physical advantages over women, especially in upper body strength. If they allow pre-op men (er sorry women) into every branch of female sports they are going to ruin it. If this becomes mainstream it will only hurt female athletes in the end.
Interesting documentary on BBC last night with some psychiatrists criticising the trend for rushing to label gender dysphoric kids as transgender and fast-tracking them through hormonal treatment and eventually surgery when it can be just a phase or someone too young to understand their latent homosexuality.
Including a really sad interview with a young woman who bitterly regretted having hormone treatment and a double mastectomy when she eventually realised she was just a tom boy. Predictably enough, this caused a lot of frothing outrage on socal media re transphobia. Some of the experts speaking talked about how intimidated they've been by transphobia campaigners for daring to hold these opinions.
Including a really sad interview with a young woman who bitterly regretted having hormone treatment and a double mastectomy when she eventually realised she was just a tom boy. Predictably enough, this caused a lot of frothing outrage on socal media re transphobia. Some of the experts speaking talked about how intimidated they've been by transphobia campaigners for daring to hold these opinions.
Last edited:
I'm definitely against transgender athletes for the reasons you described: Men have a physical advantage. In sports like MMA that's just a man beating a woman.
There are a lot of people on social media who tell you what you're supposed to think, and can make a lot of people question whether the opinions they hold make them a dick. Myself included.
The only way to make the transition look seamless is to do it before puberty and the onset of gender features such as hair and a great big Adam's apple. I still think it's way too young to make such a decision though, and you're going to end up with a lot more cases like the girl in the documentary if they allow children to transition.
I remember idly thinking some time back a good idea for a book would be a satire in which God is sued for gender discrimination for not giving a man who identified as a woman the necessary equipment to have the baby she felt she was entitled to, and born to have. I envisaged it referencing The Seventh Seal - the film where the man plays chess with death - a kind of otherworldly courtroom drama taking the piss out of all this nonsense.
Louis Theroux did a documentary a couple of years back where he met up with a number of young kids who were gender dysphoric, some who were just starting to question whether they wanted to transition and others who were undergoing it pre-puberty and it raised many of the same questions. It probably got away with less criticism than the experts because the kids and their families just spoke for themselves and the conclusions came to the viewer rather than being handed to them as facts but it was very interesting and did leave me thinking much of what @2 Man Midfield said above.
I watched that documentary and it was fascinating. Last night's one was much more provocative but it did ask some important questions, which I thought the Theroux documentary skirted around. Can gender dysphoria be a passing phase? Is it sometimes a response to awakening (homo)sexuality in a culture where we're taught that you should be attracted to a gender different to your own? I'm convinced that for some kids, the answer to one or other of these questions can be "yes" but the transphobia lobby is so powerful that these kids could end up being rail-roaded down a path that doesn't suit them. The doctor in the documentary (who IMHO seemed quite reasonable) was sacked because of one such campaign against him.
I hate this stuff. The power that social media has these days is dangerous.
I once read about a court case featuring a man who sued God for, amongst other things, not giving the plaintiff the guitar skills of Jimi Hendrix.