The premise that racism is present in every interaction is false. Reasoning that starts with a false premise and employs logical arguments results in false conclusions. (Occasionally a true conclusion is reached by accident from a false premise, e.g., as a result of illogical reasoning from the premise). So, there is a part of critical t…
The premise that racism is present in every interaction is false. Reasoning that starts with a false premise and employs logical arguments results in false conclusions. (Occasionally a true conclusion is reached by accident from a false premise, e.g., as a result of illogical reasoning from the premise). So, there is a part of critical theory that can be shown to be incorrect, which is the quality of reasoning used to reach conclusions.
It is more difficult to evaluate the validity of the premise without having a detailed scientific definition of "racism." Scientific definitions must be based on observable, measurable realities, not on vague undefined abstractions like "racism." Critical theorists cannot define "racism" without using circular definitions, or proposing that the term includes every possible behavior on the part of the "racist." Both of these errors empty all meaning out of the term "racism," because it can't be differentiated from the absence of "racism."
All of the critical theory arguments I have seen rely on undefined abstract terminology. The theorists appear to be incapable of defining what is meant in reality by the abstract symbols they use. Their symbols are detached from any realities, as are the minds that created them. Yet critical theorists insist on forcing changes on the concrete world that are justified by their false abstract premises, invalid reasoning and resulting false conclusions.
The premise that racism is present in every interaction is false. Reasoning that starts with a false premise and employs logical arguments results in false conclusions. (Occasionally a true conclusion is reached by accident from a false premise, e.g., as a result of illogical reasoning from the premise). So, there is a part of critical theory that can be shown to be incorrect, which is the quality of reasoning used to reach conclusions.
It is more difficult to evaluate the validity of the premise without having a detailed scientific definition of "racism." Scientific definitions must be based on observable, measurable realities, not on vague undefined abstractions like "racism." Critical theorists cannot define "racism" without using circular definitions, or proposing that the term includes every possible behavior on the part of the "racist." Both of these errors empty all meaning out of the term "racism," because it can't be differentiated from the absence of "racism."
All of the critical theory arguments I have seen rely on undefined abstract terminology. The theorists appear to be incapable of defining what is meant in reality by the abstract symbols they use. Their symbols are detached from any realities, as are the minds that created them. Yet critical theorists insist on forcing changes on the concrete world that are justified by their false abstract premises, invalid reasoning and resulting false conclusions.