CRT Poll: Is it true that the American Republic is, as it was founded to be, a system of White Supremacy?
CRT Poll: Is it true, as Derrick Bell, founder of CRT, maintains that if Americans were offered a highly beneficial deal by space aliens to sell all American blacks, that a majority would vote for this proposal?
CRT Poll: Is it true that it would be better to reject the idea that all persons are equal before the law and instead make laws which specifically favor some people and disfavor others, on the basis of their race?
CRT Poll: Would it be better if we changed our laws to remove the idea of a responsible party, one who has committed a clear offense, and instead allowed one race to sue another race for damages?
CRT Poll: Is it true that the fundamental basis of human politics and society is a zero sum struggle between racial groups?
CRT Poll: Is it true that claims such as the previous tweet and this one, do not require any empirical evidence, since all claims are nothing more than moves in a game-system of power plays between racial groups?
CRT Poll: Is it true that there is no such thing as knowledge simply, but only e.g "black racial knowledge," "white racial knowledge," etc., that "knowledge" is always and irreducibly a function of one's race and autobiography?
CRT Poll: Is it true that black Americans in 2021 are little better off (if at all) than blacks were under the regime of race-based chattel slavery in e.g. 1821?
CRT Poll: Is it true that all public policy and all political matters should be settled on the basis of a comparison of competing narratives told by different racial groups, such that the narrative of the most oppressed is deemed correct/superior?
CRT Poll: Is questioning of, disagreement with, or rejection of Critical Race Theory a morally reprehensible act of racism?
CRT Poll: Is it true that working toward racial equality in America is a fool's errand, because racism always adapts to new circumstances and ensure the permanent subordination of blacks to whites in America?
CRT Poll: Is it true that the First Amendment's enshrining of freedom of speech is in reality a White Supremacist provision that, as Richard Delgado argues, "only protects racists"?
CRT Poll: Is the practice of college and university admissions on the basis of academic merit alone a racist policy?
CRT Poll: Is it true that individual persons do not and should not have rights, but rather groups, specifically races, do and should alone have rights?
CRT Poll: Should the idea of Affirmative Action be extended to apply to the American criminal justice system, so that different races would be treated differently under the law in order to achieve race equity in prisons and jails?
CRT Poll: Is it true that all the complexities of human beliefs and politics can be reduced to an analysis of racial power dynamics, and decided on this basis alone?
CRT Poll: Is it true that a despotism under a despot who holds the 'correct' ideology is preferable to a liberal republic in which are free to hold, believe, espouse, and advocate for 'incorrect' ideologies?
CRT Poll: Is it true that it is better to destroy an imperfect but beneficial political system on the ground that, since it is not, in fact, perfect, it does result in some injustice?
CRT Poll: Should affirmative action NOT be regarded as an in principle temporary means to the good end of racial inclusion and equality, but rather as a permanent preferment of some races over others in the correct racial hierarchy?
CRT Poll: Should taxes be levied on the basis of the taxpayers race, so as to distribute the tax burden in a racially equitable way?
CRT Poll: Should the doctrines of Critical Race Theory be taught in American K-12 schools?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Kant’s famous dictum “being is not a real predicate”—which he took from Wolff and uses in a Wolffian sense—is actually quite trivial. A “real predicate” is one which determines a thing in regard to what it is, that is, it pertains to essence. Whereas being pertains to existence.
So to say “being is not a real predicate” is just to say that “predicating existence to something is not an essential determination of the thing.”
This is true in all cases in which essence and existence are distinct—everything, that is, but God.
Kant’s critique of the ontological argument (which is Kant’s name for it), amounts to this:
For the ontological argument to work, existence would need to be a real predicate. But nowhere do we find this to be so. So the argument doesn’t work.
The professor puts the woman on the spot by asking “You took this class because I’m black?”
That is EITHER suppose to matter deeply OR it isn’t. Which is it?
Critical Race Theory and Wokeness in general both CLAIM that blacks have special “black ways of knowing.”
If black people really do have special “ways of knowing”, then why on earth would it be a bad thing to select a class on the basis of the professor’s race?
Only if that is false would it be a questionable thing to do.
As an irrational feeling, empathy tells us almost nothing. Ethics is about action, about what should be done, should not be done, or is permissible to do or not do. There are no ethical systems that appeal to empathy *as* a justification.
There is no action A that would be made right by or justified by “I feel/felt empathy.” At best, empathy could be a partial motive for a right action — but even then the rightness of the action would not be a question in which empathy figures.
Empathy can easily (and commonly does) lead to wrong actions. Empathy can be evoked by storytelling, for example, and one can tell a story that paints someone not or little deserving of empathy as deserving of it.
It’s been 1 hour with Twitter just stuck on sending my 21 tweets. I’m gonna press X now, on the assumption that closing it will just vaporize the thread into the ether.
Wheel of Time: changing Egwene’s motive for leaving the Two Rivers and following Moiraine has been praised as ‘justification’ for changing the basic rules of the world of WoT, namely, that it is not possible for a man to be reborn as a woman (Egwene CANNOT BE the Dragon Reborn).
If Egwene could be the Dragon Reborn, and Moiraine doesn’t know who it is, of course she’d take Egwene with her (as she takes Rand, Mat, and Perrin in the books).
This is supposed to be a “better” reason for Egwene leaving the Two Rivers than Egwene’s own desire to leave.
Is it? Rand, Mat, and Perrin *have* to go with Moiraine.
Egwene, and for a different reason, Nynaeve, *decide* to go.
In other words, the AGENCY (at first) falls to the young women.
I suspect the Wheel of Time tv series is infected with trans ideology.
It may be a small point, but the first episode opens with Moiraine saying that the Dragon Reborn could be one of five children from the Two Rivers.
This makes no sense. The Dragon is male. He is always male. He will always be male. The Dragon is the avatar of maleness.
The Wheel of Time does reincarnate people, but it is *always* the same sex. Because “being a man” and “being a woman” in WoT is to have a connection to the Divine Source, which has a Yin-Yang male/female complementary structure. The connection is EXPLICIT in Aes Sedai & Asha'man.