Been thinking about the radical opposition between the PC-progressive concept of *representation* and the classical concept of *recognition*.
(which has the same etymological structure as *respect*: mutual knowledge, mutual seeing).
(which has the same etymological structure as *respect*: mutual knowledge, mutual seeing).
Every human being wants to be recognized *as human* by other humans. This is the root of true "inclusion": the recognition of a common humanity beyond our differences, where the word "humanity" has a metaphysical-religious significance (being relationship with the infinite).
By contrast, the concept of representation is psycho-sociological: I am defined not by my humanity, but by belonging to a certain group, more or less arbitrarily defined by singling out certain psycho-somatic or characteristics. As a result, I have a right to be "included"
not as a "I" but as a representative of my "group." Vice versa, I should feel "represented" by people who share my same features, which are the most important thing we have in common, and distinguish us from other "groups."
Needless to say, this is de-humanizing, and false to our elementary experience of being a person, who participates in a *true* human universality (bringing to the table all out ethnic and cultural features, for sure), and wants to be recognized *on that basis*.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
