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