Don't discuss the merits of the IDEA. Discuss the person. Namely the person's race.
The person's opinion about the IDEA is either valid or invalid based on their race.
In some academic departments, this method of epistemology is considered scholarly.
1/2
The person's opinion about the IDEA is either valid or invalid based on their race.
In some academic departments, this method of epistemology is considered scholarly.
1/2
Notice that we still haven’t discussed the IDEA. We don’t need to.
This method works for any IDEA.
Notice also that this method is rooted in the logical fallacy of imputing motives – i.e., mind-reading.
#quackery
2/2
This method works for any IDEA.
Notice also that this method is rooted in the logical fallacy of imputing motives – i.e., mind-reading.
#quackery
2/2
3/2. 😬 You can also say it uses the logical fallacy of the ad-hominem, as you're discreding a person's comments about the IDEA based on the person/personhood (in this case, his racial identity), not on his comments about the IDEA.
4/2. 😬😬
@IsaiahLCarter and I discussed this yesterday over a beer in Woke Williamsburg. 🦸🏼♂️ Isaiah, is that about right? Anything else to add?
(Isaiah isn't quite at the Linsday level for understanding the hardcore roots of this stuff, but he's damn close.)
@IsaiahLCarter and I discussed this yesterday over a beer in Woke Williamsburg. 🦸🏼♂️ Isaiah, is that about right? Anything else to add?
(Isaiah isn't quite at the Linsday level for understanding the hardcore roots of this stuff, but he's damn close.)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
