Gotcha, Tyler. Thanks. Greg On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 12:42 PM James Tyler Carpenter < [log in to unmask]> wrote: > *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links > or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is > safe. > ------------------------------ > i go by Tyler, Greg and thank you. i will wait for the opinions of the > rest as well. part of the beauty lies in the thoughtfulness of the > responses. > thank you, > tyler > > James Tyler Carpenter, PhD, FAACP > www.metispsych.com > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.experts.com_Expert-2DWitnesses_search-3Fkeyword-3DClinical-2520psychology-26keywordsearchtype-3DAll-2520Words-26category-3DClinical-2520forensic-2520-26categorysearchtype-3DAny-2520Word-26name-3DJames-2520tyler-2520carpenter-26namesearchtype-3DAll-2520Words-26company-3DMetis-26companysearchtype-3DAll-2520Words-26address-3D-2520-26addresssearchtype-3DAll-2520Words-26state-3DMA-26statesearchtype-3DAny-2520Word-26country-3DALL-2520-28or-2520Choose-2520a-2520Country-29-26countrysearchtype-3DAll-2520Words-26page-3D1-26freshsearch-3D1&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=ghKTwlFVkSxCBsWtImi6gJpiZYBkbqDPkOPCUL6-WQs&s=ODYBqoHGIDj71BaJ5D_1C-NmhUCMhdnfekYIQBUwSB4&e= > ------------------------------ > *From:* tree of knowledge system discussion < > [log in to unmask]> on behalf of Greg Thomas <[log in to unmask] > > > *Sent:* Saturday, October 24, 2020 12:30:42 PM > *To:* [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]> > *Subject:* Re: TOK Are all white people racist?: WIKI Letters exchange > with Greg Thomas > > *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links > or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is > safe. > ------------------------------ > James, > > It's certainly fine with me for you to use the exchange. > > Deepak, I'll respond soon to your remaining points and questions in the > next few days. I appreciate the engagement! > > Greg > > On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 11:45 AM James Tyler Carpenter < > [log in to unmask]> wrote: > > *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links > or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is > safe. > ------------------------------ > Hi Gregg, Deepak, Bradley, and all, > > i have been ducking in and out of this discussion as time and obligation > allow due to requests from colleagues and friends to address these issues > in conference venues on psychosis and international forensic MH. i would > like to share this fascinating and important thread with colleagues who > though motivated, knowledgeable and professional, may not be familiar with > the current call and response (cybernetic, systemantics) of the music of > the spheres. i would not do this without the consent of all contributors on > the content and format: > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.isps-2Dus.org_&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=ghKTwlFVkSxCBsWtImi6gJpiZYBkbqDPkOPCUL6-WQs&s=Vdx_S7olpb278tOCVB_lxojL4HmU6f4-3-BZP3Y8J_0&e= > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.isps-2Dus.org_&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=BOXvzJo2LsWO-LfWBMylqd-G5-78qvqjotEvZYciRUc&s=d-j9CT6Jl1Hnnq949_kshyAz3OlXgY8Yz__rYzJe7Ew&e=> > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__ialmh.org_lyon-2D2021_&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=ghKTwlFVkSxCBsWtImi6gJpiZYBkbqDPkOPCUL6-WQs&s=W-Jd7_Xr2R97nlLkGDRR06iCTi0Y2xMoewxL-OgXwnc&e= > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__ialmh.org_lyon-2D2021_&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=BOXvzJo2LsWO-LfWBMylqd-G5-78qvqjotEvZYciRUc&s=AljqKGEErEqHuSwpMELq_2Fym59fCN7ywkOpsW1twuA&e=> > > what are the contributors thoughts ? > > best regards, > Tyler > > > James Tyler Carpenter, PhD, FAACP > www.metispsych.com > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.metispsych.com&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=BOXvzJo2LsWO-LfWBMylqd-G5-78qvqjotEvZYciRUc&s=QMR6I1aMHVSyQC9BVMVIaqMga8QgA_yStICuOy21qG8&e=> > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.experts.com_Expert-2DWitnesses_search-3Fkeyword-3DClinical-2520psychology-26keywordsearchtype-3DAll-2520Words-26category-3DClinical-2520forensic-2520-26categorysearchtype-3DAny-2520Word-26name-3DJames-2520tyler-2520carpenter-26namesearchtype-3DAll-2520Words-26company-3DMetis-26companysearchtype-3DAll-2520Words-26address-3D-2520-26addresssearchtype-3DAll-2520Words-26state-3DMA-26statesearchtype-3DAny-2520Word-26country-3DALL-2520-28or-2520Choose-2520a-2520Country-29-26countrysearchtype-3DAll-2520Words-26page-3D1-26freshsearch-3D1&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=ghKTwlFVkSxCBsWtImi6gJpiZYBkbqDPkOPCUL6-WQs&s=ODYBqoHGIDj71BaJ5D_1C-NmhUCMhdnfekYIQBUwSB4&e= > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.experts.com_Expert-2DWitnesses_search-3Fkeyword-3DClinical-2520psychology-26keywordsearchtype-3DAll-2520Words-26category-3DClinical-2520forensic-2520-26categorysearchtype-3DAny-2520Word-26name-3DJames-2520tyler-2520carpenter-26namesearchtype-3DAll-2520Words-26company-3DMetis-26companysearchtype-3DAll-2520Words-26address-3D-2520-26addresssearchtype-3DAll-2520Words-26state-3DMA-26statesearchtype-3DAny-2520Word-26country-3DALL-2520-28or-2520Choose-2520a-2520Country-29-26countrysearchtype-3DAll-2520Words-26page-3D1-26freshsearch-3D1&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=BOXvzJo2LsWO-LfWBMylqd-G5-78qvqjotEvZYciRUc&s=GG1XuBfUPo_HwDVY_eCMh1W12D7rp8B5h6nfChCNjRI&e=> > ------------------------------ > *From:* tree of knowledge system discussion < > [log in to unmask]> on behalf of Deepak Loomba < > [log in to unmask]> > *Sent:* Saturday, October 24, 2020 9:50:35 AM > *To:* [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]> > *Subject:* Re: TOK Are all white people racist?: WIKI Letters exchange > with Greg Thomas > > *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links > or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is > safe. > ------------------------------ > > *Thomas,* > > *See my short comments in the trail mail.* > On 10/24/2020 6:33 PM, Greg Thomas wrote: > > *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links > or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is > safe. > ------------------------------ > Thanks Bradley, Gregg, and Deepak. > > Bradley: thanks for your note of clarification. I'm teaching my Cultural > Intelligence course online via the Aligned Center, which is based in > Westchester, NY. The founder of the Aligned Center is a Jewish-American > Buddhist Integralist who grew up playing b-ball with my cultural kin (Black > folks) and became a pioneer in the financial services industry in the early > '80s. In other words, he's a unique example of an *Omni-American. *Before > teaching this course, I've taught jazz history at the college level and for > institutions such as Jazz at Lincoln Center and the National Jazz Museum in > Harlem. > > Gregg: Thanks again! > > Deepak: I wonder if you're being intentionally provocative. > > > *DL: Greg: No. unintentionally :-) * > > > *(Hope humour is appreciated in the group, else all work & no play, makes > us dull girls and boys!) * > I say this because in a battle between intellectuals and > non-intellectuals, the latter *do not* always win handsomely. From an > American democratic and pluralistic perspective, various groups vie for > influence in a ceaseless struggle which can be deemed *antagonistic > cooperation. *The three branches of government exemplify this balance of > a dynamic equilibrium. The "adversarial" legal system, the same. It's not a > question of either cooperation or competition, it's a both/and reality. > > *DL: Undeniably. I recognize aforementioned & appreciate it. That is why I > quoted that one of the reasons for failure of communism was absence of > competition. * > > > Regarding "winning," I guess it matters which game is being played, over > what period of time, and at what scale. I, for instance, see race as an > example of James Carse's "finite game," which is about winning and losing. > On the other hand, I see culture as an "infinite game," which is played for > the sake of continuing to play the infinite game of life. Simon Sinek took > Carse's idea and extended the infinite game concept to business. Jamie > Wheal, in his upcoming book, extends the idea of the infinite game to the > very democratic system established by the founding fathers of the U.S. > > Further, ancient Greek philosophy and ideas (which are aspects of ancient > Greek *culture*) still resonate and influence the thought and culture of > our time. Those intellectuals and artists did not lose in the infinite > game. What about the Renaissance? The thought and artistry of that period > still resonates in the infinite game of culture. What about the > intellectuals of the Enlightenment and the Scientific Revolution? You get > the point. > > *DL: Victory (success) is to be strictly seen in the time of its > occurrence. Else the relevance of success or failure of an idea is lost, > because it is to much doped with feeding tributaries that its original > character can no more be evaluated. Indeed, evaluating an idea under a > banner after the idea is completely metamorphed into something completely > difference is a common mistake. Indeed, the **primality of assessment at > the time of occurrence* > * is the underlying idea of an article of mine accessible here > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__deepakloomba.medium.com_success-2Dexcellence-2Drecognition-2Da3aa1e2eed03&d=DwMDaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=K2Aeu0wmY0VknFf28VY5HEClWkEAg7JPY3LjfyeHuUI&s=No_v4O3yL2UA5wlcIF1kFaRut9R37oYEDmW2bK6vtgk&e=>. > * > > > Further still, all intellectuals aren't specialists to whom the whole is > lost, leaving "unintended consequences" in their wake due to their > specialization, though unthought of eventualities from ideas and > intellectual activity are inevitable. One reason I focus on Culture is > because in the history of ideas, Culture is a pregnant idea from which to > consider the whole, not just the parts. > > *DL: I think both me and you, have opinions. But your aforementioned > statement leaves me with another question, can an intellectual be > specialist in nothing. "Jack of all trades as we say". Who then is an > intellectual?* > > > Re: your last sentence, interest groups that just remain a small clique > are self-defeating if and only if they stay self-contained and don't > interact with others. In these days of hyper-connectivity, that's rarely > the case. > > > *DL: I think this needs a nuanced approach. And humbly express my > disagreement. Hyperconnectivity more often is pushing even those on fence > to one or other side. Division in society that America is facing is not > because the two camps didn't exist. But it is because of exponential fall > in the number of people who were let to sit on the fence. Fence sitters > have been forced to disembark the fence through precipitation of situation. > It is indeed connectivity & social media that has precipitated the > situation. Information in the face of one, leaves no room for ignorance, > which I believe was the black matter that ensured equilibrium for long. The > swing people, swing states, easily influenced souls. And this phenomenon is > global. It is exactly the same situation in India, though the dipoles are > not econo-racial, but econo-religious. Push of social media from the > fence/balance of socio-political ignorance and the consequent jump is not > taken to this or that side is not taken intellectually , but emotionally. > No one is bothered about the desert that follows the beautiful green garden > to which many jump. Immediate takes precedence over long term. * > > > But your second question is more profound. In other words, upon what > criteria do we evaluate the good, the true, and the beautiful (there go > those Greeks again!) of the competing camps? Especially for common folk > just living their lives and trying to make life better for their immediate > family and social circle? Well, that's why intellectuals and artists forge > visions of possibility through which others (including commoners) can > eventually see a different (and conceivably better) future. > And for me, this is where history and developmental psychology intersect. > If we view history through that lens (as do, for instance, Spiral Dynamics, > Integral metatheory, and Metamodernism), we can see the worldviews that > provide the value systems of the camps. The values systems drive belief > systems and behavior, as well as the rituals and aesthetic production, > though individual and group variances exist within a worldview. Reality > ain't that linear, of course. But as what Ken Wilber calls "orienting > generalizations," such worldview and value systems analysis helps us better > see behind the curtain of the various memetic camps and what drives them. > > Bottom line: ideas matter. If they didn't, then Adam Smith and Karl Marx > wouldn't have influenced our conceptions of economics so broadly and > deeply. Same with Freud, Jung, and Skinner in psychology. Intellectuals > deal with ideas because they matter, not only to elites but to our lived, > material reality. That's why revolutions *aren't led by commoners. *They > are often led by "middle-class" intellectuals. > > *DL: I accept your response along with the succinctly explained process > history* > *→value system→belief→behaviour, but my query on assessment remains > unanswered. 'Middle-class intellectuals' is another term that needs > comprehension vis-a-vis intellectuals above. * > > > Well, enough from me today. As we say in jazz, I've got to get back into > the shed to practice, study, and hone my chops for the battles, or > rather, dialogues and democratic discourses over ideas to come. May you > each have good, safe weekends. > > > *DL: Warmly reciprocate. * > > > On Sat, Oct 24, 2020 at 7:39 AM Bradley H. Werrell, D.O. < > [log in to unmask]> wrote: > > *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links > or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is > safe. > ------------------------------ > Greg, > > Thank you for your detailed response. > > You said "Who specifically do you see enacting the guile to present > "racist" and "racism" as having two different meanings for the purpose of > social domination?" > > I apologize for not being more clear. It is actually my impression that > the "anti-racist" position using the terms "racist" and "racism" as > redefined with specialized definitions (stemming from "the universities") > as divergent from previous "Modern Liberal" definitions of the same > represents the act of willful agency designed to shame targeted populations > into silence in the social space. > > In this, the 'target population' is that group who disagrees with the > political objectives of the 'anti-racist' policy position. The purpose > being to shame them to submission to the political domination of the > anti-racist plan. > > I certainly did not recognize your position to be counted among those > positions. > > I particularly like the premise (and practice) of teaching "Cultural > Intelligence" as well as de-identification from racial categorization, and > towards individual agency in interaction, as an appropriate solution to the > problem I have pointed out in the piece posted. > > Specifically, I would like to emphasize my agreement with your premise > that while "color of skin" is fairly immutable, ego-identification with > "race" as based upon that characteristic is absolutely mutable, and > arguably beneficially muted for optimal social harmony. > > I laud you in your efforts! > > Regarding reaching a "tipping point," I would argue that it will be like > going bankrupt, slowly at first, then all the sudden. > > Where do you teach? > > > Will great respect; > > Multi-generational American, > > Bradley > > > Bradley H. Werrell, D.O. - This email is private and copyrighted by the > author. > > > On Saturday, October 24, 2020, 12:54:26 AM MST, Greg Thomas < > [log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links > or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is > safe. > ------------------------------ > Thanks to Gregg for sharing the link to my letter exchange with Vince > Horn, and for placing the actual discourse within the frame of TOK. > > Thanks to you also, Bradley, for your comments. It is to you that I > address my response: > > I'm not sure in your framing whether you are specifically referring to my > perspective as represented in the letter exchange or to the anti-racism > ideologues I critique. If by "efforts to equate "whiteness" (an immutable > characteristic of individuals) to "racist" (a mutable characteristic) are > intended to shame individuals who disagree with a particular social agenda > of the groups and individuals making the equation" you mean "anti-racist" > activists/ideologues, then yes I agree . . . mostly. > > Mostly, because whether or not one views "whiteness" as an immutable > characteristic of individuals depends on the definition of whiteness. If > you mean the common racial characterization of phenotype and skin color, > yes, that is immutable for individuals. Yet, as I say in the letter > exchange, "whiteness" has also served as a meme and ideology. In that > sense, whiteness is mutable. > > Certainly anti-racist ideologues desire to shame individuals who disagree > with their stance(s). I'd add blame and guilt too. They indeed desire to > influence and "dominate the 12th floor social organizational schema." > > And this stance does serve the interests of certain "blue church" media > elites of what you call the Legacy Modern Authoritarian system in your > "Current Social Systems Reorganization" post. Among liberal, progressive > media, "anti-racist" ideology serves their interests in social conflict to > sell papers, magazines, and generate clicks and virality . . . and the > "anti-anti-racist" ideologies of conservative media serves the same ends on > their side of the political spectrum. > > This is not theory or conspiracy to me; I know some of those editors and > they know of me and my work, but as my perspective serves neither side of > the political industrial complex, the two-party duopoly, they, for the most > part, have not allowed my byline to appear in their publications to counter > faulty positions that I saw were rising dangerously in the public > discourse. Now that discourse has become a tidal wave. > > But in the Digital Distributed system you relay and relate, Bradley, there > is more room for exercising cultural agency, being a content entrepreneur, > building alliances and one's own following, etc. Thank goodness for that, > because I've long since stopped trying to get my byline into the media of > the Blue Church, as they die an increasingly rapid death. The social > discord that they are not only covering but *enabling* is evidence of the > death rattle of a dying system. I have no doubt that the folks here and in > similar private groups in favor of the developmental advance of > consciousness, culture, and society are seeding the needed new and shaping > its vision and horizons of aspiration. > > Now back to the discussion of race and related issues. I'd appreciate you > being clearer about a few items. Who specifically do you see enacting the > guile to present "racist" and "racism" as having two different meanings for > the purpose of social domination? I tend toward autonomy in the Influence > Matrix also, but am not clear who you mean as enacting the guile and who > the dupes (the targeted populations) are. > > Which leads me to your penultimate para: > > The entirety of the discussion about these terms is intended to influence > the social structures, indeed, that is what words themselves are for. It > is the redefinition of those words to adjust the targeting of the > instruments of social oppression that can be the only intention for > uttering them. This is how "social transformation" (is intended to take) > place by these individuals (who utter such phrases). This can only be an > intentional act. > > While I agree with the use of Gramsci's hegemony in relation to the > anti-racist ideology, I also--in my individual autonomy--resist an overly > 3rd-person, structural analysis. I think an Integral approach to relating > reality incorporates 1st, 2nd, and 3rd person in the framing, as much as > possible and appropriate. > > So in case you are specifically alluding to *me and my words *as > presented in the letters as having the intent of "adjust[ing] the targeting > of the instruments of social oppression" for the sake of "social > transformation" I would say this: > > I am not so arrogant and presumptive to think that my stance of a > "non-racial" identity will bring social transformation. I present it to > clarify my own stance and to give another frame for others to consider, > others who have the critical intelligence to make up their own minds. In > the course I'm teaching on Cultural Intelligence, I make it clear that I'm > not after indoctrination. (That's one reason I resist anti-racist > ideology.) I am after people becoming more aware of the very process of > racialization, which is how race became a category that's now socially > embedded as part of what John Vervaeke calls the "cultural cognitive > grammar." > > Once people see and understand that process, they can decide for > themselves whether they want to continue buying into the popular conception > of race, which I argue has done far, far more harm than good, and is an > idea we can better do without in what some might call an Integral or > Metamodern stage of development. > > I'm presenting ideas in a marketplace of ideas in which my position is in > a clear minority--no pun intended. While I'd hope my position would achieve > a critical mass/tipping point, I certainly am not belaboring under any > illusion of this happening anytime soon. > > But I for damn sure can exercise my agency as a multi-generation Black > American citizen to strive for it--as an ancestral imperative. > > Best, > Greg Thomas > > > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 11:01 AM Bradley H. Werrell, D.O. < > [log in to unmask]> wrote: > > *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links > or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is > safe. > ------------------------------ > I certainly appreciated that treatment of the topic, which inspired me to > a certain extent. > > It appears that efforts to equate "whiteness" (an immutable characteristic > of individuals) to "racist" (a mutable characteristic) are intended to > shame individuals who disagree with a particular social agenda of the > groups and individuals making the equation. > > In terms of TOK, specifically the Influence Matrix, people generating this > narrative are seeking submission of those (dare I say) "whites" who dare > disagree with the social designs by using this narrative to generate shame > (on the 11th floor) and submission (on the 11th floor and on the 12th > floor) to dominate the 12th floor social organizational schema. > > There is a suggestion in the writing to which I am responsive that this is > somehow "incidental" or "accidental" that the words "racist" and "racism" > should be "coincidentally" having two different meanings. I would argue > that this is a product of guile, and intentional action to achieve social > domination, and subjugation of a targeted population. This would be a > confession of my personal bias, of course, which trends strongly towards > "autonomy" in the Influence Matrix. > > I will justify my interpretation a bit, for the benefit of those who are > utterly appalled by my position on this: > > The entirety of the discussion about these terms is intended to influence > the social structures, indeed, that is what words themselves are for. It > is the redefinition of those words to adjust the targeting of the > instruments of social oppression that can be the only intention for > uttering them. This is how "social transformation" (is intended to take) > place by these individuals (who utter such phrases). This can only be an > intentional act. > > I thank you for the generosity of spirit for having read that. > > Bradley > > > > > > Bradley H. Werrell, D.O. - This email is private and copyrighted by the > author. > > > On Friday, October 23, 2020, 05:43:57 AM MST, Brad Kershner < > [log in to unmask]> wrote: > > > *CAUTION: *This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links > or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is > safe. > ------------------------------ > Thank you Gregg and Greg! I am steeped in racism/anti-racism discourse in > K-12 education, and I will be on the Growing Down Podcast soon to discuss > postmodern and post-postmodern/integral anti-racism, and this is exactly > the kind of analysis that needs to be shared more widely! Super clear and > helpful - thank you! > > On Fri, Oct 23, 2020 at 8:24 AM Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx < > [log in to unmask]> wrote: > > Hi TOK List, > > > > I wanted to share this excellent correspondence between Greg Thomas and > Vince Fakhoury Horn on the question of whether all white people are racist?: > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__letter.wiki_conversation_964&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=ghKTwlFVkSxCBsWtImi6gJpiZYBkbqDPkOPCUL6-WQs&s=qW0cX00dEFICUv_IEkLDfGL-gVAINSVGgfliOrzAL5w&e= > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__letter.wiki_conversation_964&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=wjF8cZoiFchamTuxBdDEmw&m=kM5S4vZaepMSCJHArltJ24ctXQuk6gkDWGNzFkkceN8&s=umkE4qarm4HZoHCYbKbiQyNofT0hELd4Wyh9fc70PKs&e=> > . > > > > My view on this topic is strongly aligned with Greg’s. I will offer a few > thoughts and encourage folks to check it out. First, to build off the > exchange that Joe started yesterday, I think it is essential to > differentiate analyses that take place at the social aggregate level (12th > floor) from the individual human person level (11th floor). This is > particularly the case with the concept of racism, because it has (at > least!) two fundamentally different meanings > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.psychologytoday.com_us_blog_theory-2Dknowledge_201809_racism-2Dtwo-2Dvery-2Ddifferent-2Dmeanings-2Dthe-2Dword&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=_4q906EnaSUXtTocrNvObhnJOyp_TXPcVNo5NT59O_8&s=hlwlHOd6HDzT3PUnWlpD0xtrAkrmjMHNx1P1qRXD4G8&e=>. > One meaning is at the 11th floor level. That is, when someone either > explicitly endorses the belief that race is real and that some races are > inherently better than others. There are also implicit biases and > prejudices whereby a person operates to favor one race over another, even > as he may proclaim that he is not racist. These are individual or small > group level analyses. Then there is the social aggregate level, which is > the structure of society and social forces. We can clearly see that the US > was founded as a racist society in that slavery was initially built into > the fabric of the social arrangement. It is also the case that the founding > fathers were brilliant, flawed men who were dependent on racism* and* by > and large they recognized it--at least in its brutal form--to be inherently > unjust. Greg brilliantly speaks to these issues when he asks us to reflect > on which side of the founding of our country do we choose to align. > > > > With this frame, we can now come back to the fact that the dynamics of > racism are very different at the 11th floor of human person individual > versus 12th floor of social structure. Think of it this way. The US was > founded largely by Christians. Indeed, the founding documents highlight the > Creator and to this day we have the attorney general stating that our > rights (and thus American identity) derive from God > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.realclearpolitics.com_2020_10_19_our-5Frights-5Famp-5Ffreedoms-5Fderived-5Ffrom-5Fgod-5Fnot-5Ffrom-5Fgovt-5F526770.html&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=_4q906EnaSUXtTocrNvObhnJOyp_TXPcVNo5NT59O_8&s=DeWKkbBcVpPU_TqPHjij0uZppqA5Th4PA2b1eNHX5NE&e=>. > Now consider the fact that my family lineage can trace its presence in the > United States back to the Revolutionary War (my Dad, a professional > historian, did a family history). Given these social aggregate facts, now > consider the claim: *I am Christian*. Now there are some ways in which it > this has echoes of the truth. It is not accidental that I soaked my theory > in images of the Tree of Knowledge and Garden and talk about redemption in > the 21st Century. This frames my intuitive sense making far more than the > plethora of Hindu gods. This is because some of the deep grammar of my > sense making has been shaped by the Judeo-Christian culture that I grew up > in. But does that mean that I AM a Christian in meaningful sense of the > word? Of course not! I have never believed in a Christian God or that > Christ is my savior who died for our sins and was then resurrected. I have > never entered a church as a believer and I have never enacted any of the > practices and rituals that would identify me as such. I think you would be > hard pressed to find a serious Christian who would think of me as such. > > > > Let’s apply this frame to race. I was taught very early by my socially > liberal, educated parents that racism was evil. I then learned in > undergraduate back in the late 1980s how to unpack my invisible knapsack > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.racialequitytools.org_resourcefiles_mcintosh.pdf&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=_4q906EnaSUXtTocrNvObhnJOyp_TXPcVNo5NT59O_8&s=7YZhgYAj5fcNQD79EDkB1SW45p1klh4fy9G6VBP6rwY&e=> > (I think I read it the year it came out or the following year). It was by > getting exposure to those ideas that I could see, indeed, that the > structure of racism was part of my background. The echoes were clearly > there and to become aware of them was powerful and enlightening (as well as > guilt inducing). I had a similar set of insights pertaining to feminism. > Such are the awakenings that happen when one has, as I did, an excellent > mentor in social forces (Joe M was my favorite professor in undergrad)! > Notice here that I grew and changed. This is, of course, something that 12 > th floor analyses, with their macro/aggregate view, generally fail to > see. The aggregate concept “white people” fails to see both individual > differences (I am quite different than the white neighbor down the street > who sometimes puts out his confederate flag and plasters Trump signs on > everything he owns) and differences in individuals across time (I had more > implicit biases and prejudices in high school than I do now). These are > analysis for the 11th floor (i.e., human psychology; many define > personality as the science of individual differences). > > > > Let me conclude this by saying my heart has long sided with the better > angels of the Founding Fathers. As a citizen of the US, I am tainted by > racism and it lurks in the shadows of implicit frames that, even to this > day, I might be blind to. But to say I am racist is, IMO, misguided at many > levels. Most obviously, it confuses the two primary meanings of the word > and appropriate application. That is, it twists the meaning at the 12th > floor level and then applies it to me (11th floor). The flaw can be seen > in the claim I am Christian, which I think everyone would agree is largely > nonsense. The bottom line is that we should not confuse the 12th floor > context of our socialization with the 11th floor analysis of our > individual souls. > > > > Thank you, Greg, for your deep, rich, and nuanced views of this crucial > issue. > > > > Best, > > Gregg > > > > ___________________________________________ > > Gregg Henriques, Ph.D. > Professor > Department of Graduate Psychology > 216 Johnston Hall > MSC 7401 > James Madison University > Harrisonburg, VA 22807 > (540) 568-7857 (phone) > (540) 568-4747 (fax) > > > *Be that which enhances dignity and well-being with integrity.* > > Check out the Unified Theory Of Knowledge homepage at: > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.unifiedtheoryofknowledge.org_&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=ghKTwlFVkSxCBsWtImi6gJpiZYBkbqDPkOPCUL6-WQs&s=FNnGQJRdx_l72eSntodRFBgL94ouvVSRq0Z8iQ9Cud8&e= > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.unifiedtheoryofknowledge.org_&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=_4q906EnaSUXtTocrNvObhnJOyp_TXPcVNo5NT59O_8&s=wiYqdJIQxtXu-8K27PK7Vi4WlIsS1MYza0hMz5Mlnw4&e=> > > > ############################ > > To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the > following link: > http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 > > ############################ > > To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the > following link: > http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 > ############################ > > To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the > following link: > http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 > > ############################ > > To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the > following link: > http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 > ############################ > > To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the > following link: > http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 > > ############################ > > To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the > following link: > http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 > > -- > ############################ > > To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the > following link: > http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 > ############################ > > To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the > following link: > http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 > > ############################ > > To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the > following link: > http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 > ############################ > > To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: > mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the > following link: > http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1 > ############################ To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1