2020 Tanner Lecture on Human Values - Theorizing Racial Justice - Charles W. Mills

[@tinterlight]

RIP prof - a lion has fallen.

[@keithag2000]

He passed away? That is sad to hear!

[@wasifmahmood834]

RIP Dr Mills. Great loss.

[@okallup8012]

Get this man on 101.5 The Breakfast Club in New York. Educate the people Dr. Mills!

[@mikedeezl]

ummm, no.

[@craigvatosvann548]

@@mikedeezl c xxxxxxxxdxxxxxxdxxxxxddçxxxxxc c c c d

[@ruffdawgg]

This is not education. This guy gave many examples of history that are completely incorrect. Besides that, ideology of any sort is the most dangerous threat to society. Have a truly open mind, get off your high horse and admit that nothing is perfect, including yourself. This is just further labeling and division.

[@okallup8012]

@@mikedeezl um, yes.

[@okallup8012]

@@ruffdawgg Nope, knowledge is power. This is not division, this is education and it it vital. You cannot and will not stop it.

[@AnthonyL0401]

38:55 Discussed a main objection within philosophy that philosophy is influenced by "white washing", the objection being that philosophy is about the human condition and therefore includes all people. His retort to this objection is that the experience of people of color are not corresponding enough to seamlessly include POC within white philosophy's abstractions.

[@deprisestelle4377]

Thanks you Charles Rest in Love and power

[@ryyanmanasseh8146]

Professor Mills is actually a Jamaican, Jamaicans have a somewhat radical sense of humour...decending from slavery it was a necessary tool to stay sane. He is not degrading himself, I believe anyone from black culture would have seen it as a joke and nothing more than that.

[@masoncash8991]

It would be nice to also see a copy of the handout, please.

[@petalongjm]

They are always so detailed. I'd love a copy too.

[@grantray98]

The handout was excellent, I'll see if I can find it if I've still got it

[@chierihiga6682]

I would love a copy of the handout as well!

[@grantray98]

Found it! Moving out of my apartment and it finally appeared. Email [e-mail] if you'd like me to scan and send you a copy

[@Tetragrammaton22]

@@grantray98 You could scan and upload the image to imgur or something to share easier, also without giving out your email address.

[@asmahamidullah9571]

May the Creator bless him richly! 🤲🏽❤🤲🏽🇹🇹

[@maxfiction]

That first questioner forgot to ever take off his veil of ignorance..

[@stevenhorn7463]

What a mess of a human being. I have to wonder how specifically he thinks “reverse racism” has manifest in his life.

[@AnthonyL0401]

I wish that guy had been in good faith -- I was interested in the answer. He doesn't realize that his resentment prevented possible solution of a tough issue. And he is not the only person with resentments over how he is being treated, but he does not see that.

[@karenspurr971]

@@AnthonyL0401 I think he was also shocked to learn that we are racist and always were

[@nils-hennesstear6058]

The first questioner is Major Ian Fishback who famously blew the whistle on torture in Iraq and Afghanistan, spurring legislation to outlaw the use of 'enhanced interrogation' on 'enemy combatants' in US custody. By the time this lecture took place, Ian was many years into a profound mental health crisis that was exacerbated by his abysmal treatment at the hands of some colleagues in the military and a dysfunctional mental helath system in the US that utterly failed him. This crisis ultimately lead to his premature death not two years after this recording was made and just two months after Charles Mills himself passed. Ian passed away in a group home. He was 42. I knew Ian personally. We overlapped in Michigan Philosophy's grad programme a few years before this lecture was recorded. We use to run, work out, and play flag football together. Ian was a bright, intellectually curious, and empathetic human being, and nothing like the confused and angry individual who appears in this recording. How sad that both speaker and questioner have since passed. Both heroes in their own ways. You can read about Ian and his ultimately fatal difficulties here [note: paywall]: www.nytimes.com/2023/02/21/magazine/ian-fishback.html

[@trinydex]

it's strange that no one brings up the topic of meritocracy and where it fits in with the "rectification of injustice," if at all.

[@karlaiken6152]

Perhaps they can use my friend Charles to help heal America's deep social imbalances & wounds.

[@AnthonyL0401]

40:30 Discusses John Rawls' philosophy

[@ajw5604]

How can I get a copy of the diagram at 1:00 ?

[@samhoadley-brill6660]

can you upload the symposium?

[@AnthonyL0401]

22:30

[@andressalgado4820]

The chair guy needs to practice his speech

[@startpage717]

8:06

[@HansSilver]

Where this man was living in , In Mars ?

[@c.kevincrow2115]

Would appreciate he not frame himself as dishonest, self-deluded, and unprincipled: "My first degree was in physics, then I switched to philosophy. The real reason was that in physics you do actual experiments, and I found that they never came out the way I wanted, so you constantly have to forge them. The great virtue of philosophy is that you had to do thought experiments, and you then have complete control of the outcome. This was clearly the kind of discipline I had been waiting for, the physics thing was a big mistake. So in all seriousness when I got this invitation I was flattered, I felt honored, but I was also shocked, because I thought of myself - we like to sort of position ourselves with various delusions - I thought of myself as this radical oppositional guy, and I said radical oppositional guys don't give the Tanner lectures, that's something that's like a blot on your CV. So maybe I'll have to think this over; and then they mentioned the honorarium and I said ok, I guess I'll have to give up my principles just this once." His subsequent criticism of classical liberalism (more precisely, as implemented) is welcome.

[@benjamins2458]

The thing is, Rawlsian analyses really do depend on making thought experiments work the way you want them to.

[@Tetragrammaton22]

He's clearly opening with a joke. A very common approach when giving a talk to an audience. Endear the audience to you with a self-deprecating joke at the start and you have their ear for the rest of your lecture.

[@petersenior2584]

This was for me a self-deprecating joke to open the talk -:)

[@c.kevincrow2115]

@Heidi No, I get that he is trying to make an ironic joke - it's the joke I dislike, not the delivery. Why he is doing it, I can only guess (preventing others from - presumably dishonestly - raising the same points, to his detriment?). Philosophy (the analytic and scholastic traditions in particular) and physics are fields particularly demanding of care in framing definitions and identifying what follows from what - those who do a poor job (they are many) require correction for the integrity of the work they do. Put otherwise, they need to be paradigms of truth and honesty. If he's learnt something of the lessons they have to offer (and I think he has), kudos to him; but he should drop the bit. Jokes and stories are great - trivializing honesty is not.

[@khubza8999]

HUGE LOSS!

[@Mpreziv]

This is racist propaganda. Point blank..

[@maeschder]

Sure, if your definition of non-racism is just ignoring history and all of its economical and political implications like a simpleton. Here a quote from one of his works, so as to show it is far more nuanced than your take would make it out to be (the following sections go on to eviscerate the idea that you can just ignore race or pretend to have trancended the idea of race): "While skeptics may concede that racism was central to the ideological rationale for imperialism and colonialism, this concession will not generally be intended to imply the same for race. One is ideational, the other material. The understandable fear is that this vocabulary, this kind of discourse, cannot in fact be retrieved without a resurrection of Social Darwinist assumptions, or something similarly dubious. After all, it will be pointed out, it is no accident that these terms have disappeared from mainstream theory. Why try to revive a language that is surely no more than an “oppositional” version of classic racial theory, an “anti-racist racism” in Sartre’s famous characterization of Negritude - motivationally perhaps perfectly understandable, but theoretically obviously problematic, a stage to be sublated and transcended? Moreover, how in any case could this vocabulary be applied on a global scale? So a series of refutations is constructed, what could be seen as concentric fallback positions: either race does not exist at all, or it does not exist globally, or it does not exist in the way necessary to sustain any generalizations and theorizations, descriptive and normative, of the desired kind."

[@maeschder]

More relevant quotes, in case you also believe in the propaganda surrounding CRT designed to smear it: "Indeed, the point of the “critical” in “critical philosophy of race” and “critical race theory” - apart from linking them with “critical theory” in the left tradition - is in part precisely to distinguish them from classic “[uncritical] race theory,” which usually just meant racist theory. So, critical philosophy of race and critical race theory are explicitly anti-racist in their assumptions and their mission, and should not at all be seen as potentially assimilable to a nonwhite version of Rassenwissenschaft."

[@malikialgeriankabyleswag4200]

I hated this

[@dougbamford]

What exactly did you hate and why?

[@malikialgeriankabyleswag4200]

@@dougbamford I'd have to watch it again and come back to you maybe later today

[@malikialgeriankabyleswag4200]

@Heidi If you believe that responsibility and accountability should be taken on a collective level that means you identify more strongly with the collective than you do with any kind of native Self of your own.. Maybe because that's you're nature and you are part of a whole rather than being a Whole entity in your self. I personally don't believe in levying collective guilt, on my self at least, because that's not my nature.. I'm an individual and I want to be treated as one so for me and anybody who shares my condition, the idea of racial justice or the approach this speaker takes makes no moral sense.. Aka it makes no sense because you can't fix an injustice with a further Injustice.. And especially because most of these people suggest a reversal of the treatment of the races as a remedy for the injustices inflicted upon one race, they think we should inflict injustice on the other one and that'll even things out or something? These are fake problems the real problems are moral problems and economic conditions which these people never address.. Critical theory is dumb and not designed to achieve anything

[@malikialgeriankabyleswag4200]

@@dougbamford btw I answered that question above this

[@dougbamford]

@@malikialgeriankabyleswag4200 Thanks for the reply but I don't recognize your characterization of the position taken here. "I'm an individual and I want to be treated as one" is great and all but the point is that this has not been the case, and darker-skinned people in particular (but also at some times, women, Jews, Roma) have certainly not been treated as individuals but rather as less worthy due to their membership of a group (even if they didn't ask to be included in that group). Ignoring that fact seems likely to compound the injustice here, rather than resolving it. Whether or not you want to fully sign up to reparations or critical race theory or whatever surely it is important to recognize the history of white supremacist attitudes and the ongoing legacy and impact of this? A bit of honesty about history is surely the best way to make sure people are treated as individuals in the future?

[@iceyred6668]

montgomer v. county tripple Height't 7''12 Doorwaey's 14''double drwy. /Q 17 school 18 drisctirch.art.ey R / College''kksi [educatiion] //nd.D