Painia says this after complaining about “several people who will dismiss your voice and your complaints because you haven’t provided enough proof that what you are saying is real.” — czahar
But having knowledge of something doesn’t absolve people from supporting their claims. — czahar
In a court of law, first hand accounts are evidence. — unenlightened
In a court of law, first hand accounts are evidence. Now I doubt that many would say that such evidence is proof, because folks can lie or be mistaken. But the complaint is precisely that the evidence is dismissed without evidence to the contrary, and the evidence of testimony is discounted on one side and counted on the other. — unenlightened
I'm not a fan — Terrapin Station
I would never suggest that we simply dismiss someone's lived experience outright. I'm just saying that it's not above criticism. That it can and -- under certain circumstances, should -- be questioned. — czahar
I'd like to see some evidence of this; I'm not going to convict you on your confession alone. — unenlightened
For the most part (I'll avoid detailing this for robots at the moment) my view is that persons' "lived experience" should be above criticism. — Terrapin Station
Statements that go beyond inner experiences -- e.g., statements about discrimination a person has faced or abuse they have received -- do need to be questioned, though. — czahar
And provide evidence of this too. — unenlightened
I would never suggest that we simply dismiss someone's lived experience outright. — czahar
Thing is, the complaints you guys are complaining about, the testimonies that you are allegedly legitimately criticising are those of folks such as women and black people whose testimony is historically regarded as questionable, and there is a huge and long history that a part of low status is nearly always that the testimony is also given a low status. And that this is the testimony that you both bring into question yourselves is the corroboration that you demand that this is a continuing problem and the complaints are true. You yourselves are the proof of the validity of the experience. — unenlightened
↪czahar Analogies are not evidence. — unenlightened
Yup. You want to question that? — unenlightened
This may be true, but if it is, the answer is not to put marginalized people's testimony on a status above belief; it's to not be so trusting of privileged people's. — czahar
You could have provided examples of questionable whites and males, but you did not. And that is is evidence that is not a matter of opinion but can be checked by anyone who cares to took at your op. Evidence that contradicts your claims of fair-mindedness. — unenlightened
I am doing what you claim is the right thing and questioning your claims in the light of the evidence, — unenlightened
and finding them unsupported, — unenlightened
It's not like there's a great shortage of white men full of shit to question. — unenlightened
When asked to provide evidence that people's lived experiences can and should be questioned, I gave you an analogy to illustrate why. You said "analogies weren't evidence" and I explained why they were. You dropped it there. — czahar
There's a level of courtesy and generosity in giving people the benefit of the doubt but the left uses this generosity to levy heavy criticism towards groups, systems and the like which isn't really appropriate. — Judaka
Yeah, I'm not in the business of convincing you, so I'm happy to leave everything here, and let the jury of readers reach their own judgement. — unenlightened
Which is what I am doing, and you are not. You could have provided examples of questionable whites and males, but you did not. And that is is evidence that is not a matter of opinion but can be checked by anyone who cares to took at your op. Evidence that contradicts your claims of fair-mindedness. And you might want to claim now that it is just an accident, but as I said already, history informs us that it is no accident at all but an ongoing rhetoric that sustains privilege and status.
I am doing what you claim is the right thing and questioning your claims in the light of the evidence, and finding them unsupported, and indeed contradicted by the evidence. It's not like there's a great shortage of white men full of shit to question. — unenlightened
Though I’m a Democratic Socialist, I can’t get behind everything the Left does, and one of the practices I find particularly disagreeable is the appeal to “lived experience.” — czahar
OP clearly framed the context of how the left prioritises the lived experience of particular groups as a political agenda, he explained his interest in this problem as a problem with the left and not just generally. If there was another political group who were talking about the "white" experience and using it in arguments that OP felt empirical facts should be relevant, he might've been making a thread about that instead. Both you and unenlightened have presented this red herring which has absolutely nothing to do with the OP. — Judaka
Your whole post is absolutely ridiculous, such self-righteous drivel. Do you think you and unenlightened, by insinuating OP is a racist and challenging him on that posited racism have shown moral courage? News flash, racism is not fashionable, what OP is saying is the harder thing to say because people like you judge him unreasonably. — Judaka
I honestly don't know why OP is being so reasonable to unenlightened after the show he's put on here. OP tried to bring up examples that have nothing to do with race, unenlightened practically made OP plead to him that he's not a racist and there's absolutely no justification for it. He clearly framed that he was criticising the aspect of the left that did it, there was no reason to bring up an example of it outside of what the left was saying. I wouldn't have had the patience to even continue replying. — Judaka
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.