Read on Twitter
There is nothing more unenlightened — more wilfully ignorant — than attacking people for encouraging curiosity about the assumptions behind accepted truths.
That James’s targets are most often Black is no accident, of course. It’s central to his asinine campaign of pretending that points about the role of conventions are impositions of a “woke” orthodoxy.
But even were that not the case, the basic position here is fear of thought.
But even were that not the case, the basic position here is fear of thought.
Treating this fear of thought as itself worthy of thoughtful engagement — meeting it halfway, as it were, and thus spotting it a degree of credibility it hasn’t earned — is unjustified and likely self-defeating.
Exposing fear of thought for what it is may not be.
Exposing fear of thought for what it is may not be.
Likewise, comparing the historical claims, stances and discursive strategies of pretended defenders of “Science” or “Enlightenment” or “Western Civilization” with what scholars know of these things does not seem futile.
At worst, it’s an opportunity to reflect on our knowledge.
At worst, it’s an opportunity to reflect on our knowledge.
Of course, it is also worth noting the abuse that fear of thought knowingly underwrites. E.g. https://twitter.com/Laurie_Rubel/status/1294540198018265088?s=20
And, already RT'd in responses https://twitter.com/kareem_carr/status/1294657351627284482?s=20
Finally, it's worth remembering that this cynical mode of engagement has been *fundamental* to James's presence on here and to the following he has developed. He presents it as a choice that has to do with the medium; in reality, it's the only move he has. https://twitter.com/mccormick_ted/status/1209166625502629888?s=20
