It's a purely pro-forma tribute to the gods that not only does not require evidence but does not actually permit its introduction.
Doing so would entail acceptance of the premise that such assertions require evidence when it is in fact meant to be accepted as a matter of dogma
Doing so would entail acceptance of the premise that such assertions require evidence when it is in fact meant to be accepted as a matter of dogma
https://twitter.com/kcjohnson9/status/1459995927675031552
Those habituated to the standards and practices of the old dispensation in which assertions required evidence find this kind of ritualized faith-based statement puzzling.
It's the new normal.
It's the new normal.
"Implicit racism and sexism has been constant" is a statement will never not be true because the definition of those terms can always be expanded to ensure that it is always already the case
The modifier "implicit" is itself, of course, a marker of that very process having moved to a very advanced stage
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
