Culture Intellectual freedom Intelligent Design

Peter Boghossian on the Woke and cultural suicide

Spread the love

Readers may remember Peter Boghossian as the power behind some of the best and funniest Sokal hoaxes (exposing academic journals that publish utter nonsense). One of his associates recently shone a light on the current war on math.

Anyway, Boghossian gets serious here:

“We can’t just keep funding people who are playing in make-believe-land, cranking out information to inform public policy that’s completely divorced from reality. It’s a recipe for cultural suicide,” says Peter Boghossian, assistant professor of philosophy at Portland State University and co-author of “How to Have Impossible Conversations.”

A lifelong liberal and critic of former President Donald Trump, Boghossian believes describing people as left or right is losing utility. It’s those who demand you think a certain way who are on one side, while those who do not are on the other.

JAN JEKIELEK, “Exclusive: ‘A Recipe for Cultural Suicide’—Peter Boghossian on Woke Ideology and the Case for Defunding Universities” at Epoch Times

He’s kinder to the Woke than some of us are. Some of us think that they’re mostly just wretched mediocrities whose only joy in life is to tear down anyone, anywhere, anytime who has ever achieved anything. They dread intellectual freedom because they could make no use of it.

Face it, if they could do something better than that with their lives, they surely would.

We cut our teeth here dealing with Darwin’s empowered mediocrities, an early version of the Woke. We could charge for lessons in dealing with the Woke but we prefer to guide and mentor people who value ideas for free. It’s more fun for everyone.

Yes, there is an intellectual life worth fighting for.

See also: In Big Tech World: the journalist as censor, hit man, and snitch. Glenn Greenwald looks at a disturbing trend in media toward misrepresentation as well as censorship.

14 Replies to “Peter Boghossian on the Woke and cultural suicide

  1. 1
    polistra says:

    In this interview Boghossian is focusing on teacher training. Right place, wrong solution. Replacing one dominant theory with another dominant theory won’t last and won’t really help the students. When education is solely about theories, there’s no way to find definite truth. It’s all verbal arguments, and the Alinskyites know how to win arguments.

    The solution is to refocus education toward job skills and PHYSICAL connections to reality. When you’re cooking a turkey or repairing a car or dissecting a frog, you can’t be fooled by ANY kind of theory. Nature is right there in your hands and eyes and nose, and Nature will tell you the truth. (With some guidance from the teacher to prevent you from ruining the turkey or the car.)

  2. 2
    Belfast says:

    “ A lifelong liberal and critic of former President Donald Trump,” …
    “A lifelong vegetarian and a collector of Yehudi Menuhin LP’s.”…
    “A member of the Boggabilla Bowling Club and father of twins,”…
    How did this slip past the Irrelevancies Editor?
    Time for a standard irrelevant intro so people can ignore and skip to the story, something like,”A man suffering from TDS has …….”

  3. 3
    Latemarch says:

    Polistra@1:

    The solution is to refocus education toward job skills and PHYSICAL connections to reality. When you’re cooking a turkey or repairing a car or dissecting a frog, you can’t be fooled by ANY kind of theory.

    It’s racist to insist on correct answers in arithmetic….until you need to balance your checkbook.

  4. 4
    chuckdarwin says:

    “We cut our teeth here dealing with Darwin’s empowered mediocrities, an early version of the Woke. We could charge for lessons in dealing with the Woke but we prefer to guide and mentor people who value ideas for free. It’s more fun for everyone.”

    Who is this “we” to whom you refer? Sounds like Hubris R Us….

  5. 5
    jerry says:

    A lifelong liberal and critic of former President Donald Trump, Boghossian believes describing people as left or right is losing utility. It’s those who demand you think a certain way who are on one side, while those who do not are on the other.

    He’s wrong. The distinction between the two sides has not changed. The left cannot have open discussions since their ideas are bogus. The other side accepts open discussion. It has always been that way.

  6. 6
    doubter says:

    Jerry: “The left cannot have open discussions since their ideas are bogus. The other side accepts open discussion.”

    Interesting given the pack of lies about vote fraud promulgated by the right after the last election. Forgot about that?

  7. 7
    Belfast says:

    @Doubter@6
    You sure don’t live in Texas, do you?

  8. 8

    It is very obvious that woke people are clueless about how to deal with subjective issues in general. These are not ordinary differences of opinion, these are people who are clueless about how to form a personal opinion to begin with.

    The simple solution is to teach the difference between fact and opinion in school, more precisely. So they learn what an opinion is, and then problem solved.

    Solely creationism explains the difference between fact and opinion, validating each in their own right, in separate categories.

    1. Creator / chooses / spiritual / opinion
    2. Creation / chosen / material / fact

    Teach creationism at the teachers schools, and the whole woke problem goes away.

    The only simple practical solution.

  9. 9
    William J Murray says:

    Doubter @6 said:

    Interesting given the pack of lies about vote fraud promulgated by the right after the last election. Forgot about that?

    Whether or not they were lies is irrelevant to Jerry’s point; which side shuts down (or tries to shut down) open discussion about whether or not there was fraud? Not the right. Only the left. That is the point Jerry made.

  10. 10
    Seversky says:

    William J Murray/9

    Whether or not they were lies is irrelevant to Jerry’s point; which side shuts down (or tries to shut down) open discussion about whether or not there was fraud? Not the right. Only the left. That is the point Jerry made.

    Jerry did not mention the 63 lawsuits filed contesting the results of the 2020 election. That does not support the insinuation that the left shut down open discussion of whether or not there was fraud. Requiring that complaints of electoral fraud filed with the courts be supported by sufficient evidence to at least establish there is a case to answer is not shutting down discussion, it is inviting it. If the right is unable to put their money where their mouth is that is not the fault of the left.

  11. 11
    Karen McMannus says:

    Seversky,

    Not sure where you live, or what your understanding of the legal issues are in the USA, but absolutely zero of the cases filed that have been rejected have had anything to do with evidence of fraud. They have to do with legal standing.

    The U.S. Constitution explicitly gives state legislatures plenary control over presidential elections. States have no legal standing to sue other states for malfeasance in the process.

    The evidence of fraud is obvious. Several states have serious problems with election validity. But it’s up to the state legislatures to fix it.

    I suspect you are not a U.S. citizen, so let me educate you a bit: the Constitution gives the state legislatures plenary authority over how Presidential elections works in their states. In fact, citizens have no Constitutional right to vote for President. Surprising but true. For the first several years of the Union, several states didn’t allow citizens to determine the Electors in the process presidential election.

    Point is, something like Texas suing Pennsylvanian was wrongheaded. And all of the lawsuits at the federal level have been wrongheaded in the same way. It’s up to the the individual state legislatures and courts to work out the election problems in their own states. All of the rejected suits have been about federal legal theories, which have not obtained.

    Expect more on this at the state level.

    The ultimate arbiters in individual states are the state legislatures. Not the courts. Time will tell how it will turn out.

  12. 12
    jerry says:

    Disingenuous and wrong nearly 100% of the time

    Jerry did not mention the 63 lawsuits

    Jerry did not say anything about elections.

    When a new separate thread is opened up about elections, that will be the place to discuss. My point can be contested on this issue there.

    What is it about some people that they must lie all the time. Maybe they read fake news all the time and believe it.

    They should read the Babylon Bee instead. It’s

                               Fake News You Can Trust

  13. 13
    William J Murray says:

    Seversky @10 said:

    Jerry did not mention the 63 lawsuits filed contesting the results of the 2020 election. That does not support the insinuation that the left shut down open discussion of whether or not there was fraud.

    What does the ability to file a lawsuit have to do with “open discussion?”

  14. 14
    jerry says:

    For those liberals interested in Georgia election law. So they can get up to speed.

    The Babylon Bee Fact-Checks 9 Claims About The Georgia Election Law

    https://babylonbee.com/news/facts-about-the-georgia-election-law

                                    Fake News You Can Trust

Leave a Reply