It would take me an hour to explain. I started by reading the major themes of CRT at wikipedia. But one example: They question the value of basing everything in life on reason alone. They see this as a sort of White way of seeing the world. This might sound odd, but Buddhists (and other religious traditions) question the value of reason, artists question the value of reason, athletes and musicians go by intuition more than reason. They have a point.
I should add that I asked for the "reason" why CRT is positive. Since you can't think of any (if you can't describe any social idea succinctly and clearly, rest assured that it is generally BS), you embarked on attacking 'reason' itself. Nice segway, Matt!
I can understand that artists and religionists would have an issue with reason as the foundation of their ideas are subjective, psychological, and emotion-based. Theology ultimately rejects reason or it would not survive.
To call reason 'whiteness' is extremely condescending and quite reactionary. I come from the Middle East where Islam and 'spiritualism' rules. The result has been poverty, hunger, backwardness, and illiteracy. So much for non-reason. Despite this, 'reason' is held at the highest level by the masses, and is taken for granted and a necessity as a matter of discourse. What is 'whiteness' about that? Are you saying that reasoning is dismissed in non-white societies? Tell that to any person in the 3rd world and they will call you a racist and a colonialist.
You have to understand that non-reason may be acceptable at the individual level (artists, spiritualists, athletes, etc.). But at the socio-political level, non-reason leads to injustice and totalitarianism. At the economic level, non-reason leads to poverty. Surely you rather be treated by a surgeon than a witch doctor. Even in sports, physics (reason) is 99% of the works. Music is based on mathematical structures. So don't let anyone sell you this snake oil and call reason whiteness. As an individual, you are protected to act as irrationally as you wish (as long as you don't harm the rights of others). Liberal democracy guarantees that, because it is based upon an enlightened reasonable moral code. The minute society does away with reason, you will be thrown into the depths of barbarianism, fascism, communism, abject poverty, insecurity, and naturally totalitarianism.
They aren't suggesting that we abandon reason altogether, just that we question whether or not it should be the basis of every decision we make. You seem to be intent on not understand the point they are trying to make. You have to approach this with an open mind. You seem to have already made up your mind on the subject. So there's no point in trying to explain it.
So please do explain where non-reason is superior to reason in the context of CRT? You want non-reason? Go and become an Islamic fundamentalist. You'll love it. As said before, social discourse MUST be based on reason. Otherwise you are advocating fascism.
The questioning of reason is not a new phenomena and pops its head in every age. Earliest mention of that goes back to the Sophists of Greece at the time of Socrates. As you can imagine, it is a favorite tool of sophistry.
Questioning of reason has a new philosophic name: post-modernism. It was developed in literary and artistic circles of post-WWII France, and its luminaries were Derrida and Foucault. CRT has actually borrowed this tenet from the post-modernists, and it is not an invention of CRT per se. But is used by CRT to deflect criticism that address its inconsistency and its dependence on subjective phenomena. I think it suffices to say that honest Marxists such as Habermas, Chomsky, and Zizek are the strongest critics of post-modernism, as being "reactionary". The central reason that humanity has progressed to achieve enlightenment, liberalism, and civil society is because discourse has been based on reason. Imagine if in a court of law, the judge ruled based on his/her whims and what was had for breakfast.
Matt -- How is it that you avoid telling us what is so positive about CRT, and the reasoning behind it?
It would take me an hour to explain. I started by reading the major themes of CRT at wikipedia. But one example: They question the value of basing everything in life on reason alone. They see this as a sort of White way of seeing the world. This might sound odd, but Buddhists (and other religious traditions) question the value of reason, artists question the value of reason, athletes and musicians go by intuition more than reason. They have a point.
I should add that I asked for the "reason" why CRT is positive. Since you can't think of any (if you can't describe any social idea succinctly and clearly, rest assured that it is generally BS), you embarked on attacking 'reason' itself. Nice segway, Matt!
I can understand that artists and religionists would have an issue with reason as the foundation of their ideas are subjective, psychological, and emotion-based. Theology ultimately rejects reason or it would not survive.
To call reason 'whiteness' is extremely condescending and quite reactionary. I come from the Middle East where Islam and 'spiritualism' rules. The result has been poverty, hunger, backwardness, and illiteracy. So much for non-reason. Despite this, 'reason' is held at the highest level by the masses, and is taken for granted and a necessity as a matter of discourse. What is 'whiteness' about that? Are you saying that reasoning is dismissed in non-white societies? Tell that to any person in the 3rd world and they will call you a racist and a colonialist.
You have to understand that non-reason may be acceptable at the individual level (artists, spiritualists, athletes, etc.). But at the socio-political level, non-reason leads to injustice and totalitarianism. At the economic level, non-reason leads to poverty. Surely you rather be treated by a surgeon than a witch doctor. Even in sports, physics (reason) is 99% of the works. Music is based on mathematical structures. So don't let anyone sell you this snake oil and call reason whiteness. As an individual, you are protected to act as irrationally as you wish (as long as you don't harm the rights of others). Liberal democracy guarantees that, because it is based upon an enlightened reasonable moral code. The minute society does away with reason, you will be thrown into the depths of barbarianism, fascism, communism, abject poverty, insecurity, and naturally totalitarianism.
They aren't suggesting that we abandon reason altogether, just that we question whether or not it should be the basis of every decision we make. You seem to be intent on not understand the point they are trying to make. You have to approach this with an open mind. You seem to have already made up your mind on the subject. So there's no point in trying to explain it.
So please do explain where non-reason is superior to reason in the context of CRT? You want non-reason? Go and become an Islamic fundamentalist. You'll love it. As said before, social discourse MUST be based on reason. Otherwise you are advocating fascism.
The questioning of reason is not a new phenomena and pops its head in every age. Earliest mention of that goes back to the Sophists of Greece at the time of Socrates. As you can imagine, it is a favorite tool of sophistry.
Questioning of reason has a new philosophic name: post-modernism. It was developed in literary and artistic circles of post-WWII France, and its luminaries were Derrida and Foucault. CRT has actually borrowed this tenet from the post-modernists, and it is not an invention of CRT per se. But is used by CRT to deflect criticism that address its inconsistency and its dependence on subjective phenomena. I think it suffices to say that honest Marxists such as Habermas, Chomsky, and Zizek are the strongest critics of post-modernism, as being "reactionary". The central reason that humanity has progressed to achieve enlightenment, liberalism, and civil society is because discourse has been based on reason. Imagine if in a court of law, the judge ruled based on his/her whims and what was had for breakfast.