,
6 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
In case you were wondering why the grievance studies project matters (@HPluckrose @ConceptualJames @peterboghossian), NEJM published an “auto-ethnography” by a white dr. who concludes that all white doctors are racist. Her evidence? She’s racist and she’s read “White Fragility.”
“White Fragility” seems to form the foundation of the author’s assumptions about 1) her own racism, and 2) the generalizability of her discovery that she is racist to the (presumed racist) actions of every other white doctor in the country. libjournal.uncg.edu/ijcp/article/v…
According to “white fragility,” wanting to be seen as a unique individual is “narcissism,” and disagreeing with the white fragility ideology is more evidence of white fragility (“defensive moves”) whether a person is angry, afraid, feels guilty, argues, or says nothing. 
Notably, she is not at all curious about *whether* she or other doctors are “perpetuating systemic inequities for patients,” she starts from an assumption that she is, and others are.
👉 This might be true 👈
but the evidence for that essential claim is missing.
References👇
👉 This might be true 👈
but the evidence for that essential claim is missing.
References👇
Imagine if doctors used the same kind of evidence to diagnose and treat patients…
Dr: I read some ideology about cancer so I know you have it. No tests needed. Just acknowledge that you have it.
Patient: What? I need tests!
Dr: Arguing is evidence that you need chemotherapy.
Dr: I read some ideology about cancer so I know you have it. No tests needed. Just acknowledge that you have it.
Patient: What? I need tests!
Dr: Arguing is evidence that you need chemotherapy.
In sum:
“Problematizing” objectivity is destructive. We can’t solve problems using ideology instead of evidence. Even using empirically valid methods won’t solve anything if we start by “problematizing” instead of accurately identifying real problems—and their sources.
“Problematizing” objectivity is destructive. We can’t solve problems using ideology instead of evidence. Even using empirically valid methods won’t solve anything if we start by “problematizing” instead of accurately identifying real problems—and their sources.
