By TylerR on
Society & Culture
Critical Theory

Critical Theory and the Cynical Transformation of Society: A Conversation with James Lindsay

Discussion

Sat, 09/05/20

Of course “real CT people” don’t engage Lindsay! Wake up man. They only rattle around in their own playground. You are not allowed to critique CT unless you say it has not gone far enough.

Sat, 09/05/20

If I might say so myself, the stuff you link to is poison, brother. Stop it for your own good.

Sat, 09/05/20

[Mark_Smith]

Of course “real CT people” don’t engage Lindsay! Wake up man. They only rattle around in their own playground. You are not allowed to critique CT unless you say it has not gone far enough.

If you wonder why CT people don’t debate or engage with other perspectives, you don’t really get CT. I’ve read a growing realization and commentary among classical liberals concerning this feature.
In essence, CT folks believe that to engage in debate or even discussion with other perspectives is “ceding ground” and “using the enemy’s tools.” Ironically enough, “critical” and thoughtful dialogue is simply not part of their worldview.
Yes, they’ll “debate” various factual matters on the public stage. But anything deep and probing is utterly off-limits.

Sat, 09/05/20

If I might say so myself, the stuff you link to is poison, brother. Stop it for your own good.

Before I respond, what links are you talking about, and specifically what are poison about them?

Sat, 09/05/20

You asked:

Tyler, why are you so interested in CT/CRT? Are you just wanting to know more about what the world thinks? Or do you think it might be helpful.

I’m interesting in it because it’s everywhere. Literally everywhere. I have an article coming here on Tuesday that explains my latest run in with this mad new religion.

Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.

Sun, 09/06/20

Take a look at the many articles in Liberal Current. If you read that and think this is good stuff… well, you deal with it.

Sun, 09/06/20

Take a look at the many articles in Liberal Current. If you read that and think this is good stuff… well, you deal with it.

The reason I linked this article from Liberal Current is not that I agree with a lot of the articles. Because I don’t. It’s more because those who publish articles at Liberal Current hold to the same principles of Classical Liberalism that James Lindsay holds to and is operating from. As the description of Liberal Current states:

Liberal Currents offers discussion, elucidation, and defense of liberal principles and institutions. These principles—however qualified—are freedom, individualism, universalism, and pluralism, grounded in a respect for the dignity of ordinary people living ordinary lives. These principles are embedded and protected within liberal institutions: the rule of law, due process, democratic politics, private property, markets, and institutions of free inquiry and expression.

While the authors may at times disagree about the various forms liberalism may take as these values are contextualized in lived experience, the unified editorial voice believes liberalism is alive and more critical than ever. As popular faith and confidence in liberal principles and institutions ebb, Liberal Currents commits to their rejuvenation and vigorous defense.

The writers are Lindsay’s colleagues. So when Lindsay and Pluckrose write a book and the reviewer points out that it does not even come close to rising to the scholarly standard of classical liberalism because they misrepresent the views of the CT/CRT scholars they are critiquing, creating one giant strawman to take down, I’m going to research it for myself rather than rely on a couple of atheists authors who are financially profiting off of conservative Christians that are so desperate for that magic bullet to take down CT/CRT once and for all.

And as I mentioned before, Dotson, Fricker, Code, Wolf, Medina, Mills, and Bailey (I’ve only read articles from Medina), are probably wrong on a number of areas in evaluating race and culture. But, for the sake of truth, let’s make sure we are accurate with the actual bad secular ideas rather than with caricatures of what they actually believe. As Christians, we are accountable to make sure we are always truth-telling as we avoid the sin of slander.

Mon, 09/07/20

I decided to grab a copy of Millard Erickson’s Truth or Consequences: The Promise & Perils of Postmodernism. Erickson has an MA in Philosophy from the University of Chicago, and this training shows up in perhaps all his writings. The book dates from 2001, but that doesn’t bother me. I just want a trustworthy, accessible introduction to post-modern philosophy with some Christian pushback. I don’t want a polemic book, but an educational book. Erickson is well-known for his irenic tone and fairness. This is likely the book I’ve been looking for to guide me to better understand the issues today, and will act as a springboard to engage the primary sources. Thought I’d pass it along, in the event anyone is interested.

Erickson is about 90 now, and I doubt he’ll publish anything else. But, I am astounded at the quantity and quality of the material he’s produced. He hit his heyday in the 1980s - 1990s, which is why I suspect he is not as popular today as he once was. There are no Zondervan video curriculums to accompany his materials (etc.). But, I don’t believe many scholars today can match his breadth of study and topics. He is my favorite theologian, by far. He doesn’t overreach into areas he’s not competent to discuss, which is always a plus!

Tyler is a pastor in Olympia, WA and works in State government.