Withcraft and Races

DANIEL.DAVIES at flemings.com DANIEL.DAVIES at flemings.com
Wed Mar 8 05:04:02 PST 2000


Please respond to lbo-talk at lists.panix.com

To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com cc: (bcc: DANIEL DAVIES) bcc: DANIEL DAVIES Subject: Re: Withcraft and Races


>From Justin to Rakesh:


>>As I see it,
>>the problem with your strategy is that it concedes that the argument is
>>valid, that if the premises are coherent and true, if Blacks are
genetically
>>dumb, then they can be consigned to the rubbish heap of society, or at
least
>>that there is no point in affirmative action. It seems to me that this
point
>>ought not be conceded, because the argument is invalid.


>Saying that race is an invalid concept to use in research on genetic
>differences in mental capacity is *not at all* to concede that "if Blacks
>are genetically dumb, then they can be consigned to the rubbish heap of
>society." The former doesn't logically entail the latter.

Errrrrr .... but vica veeca versa? Isn't it exactly Justin's point that "Saying that whether or not blacks are genetically dumb, they can't be dumped on the scrapheap is not at all to concede that race is a valid concept to use in research on genetic differences in mental capacity? Or am I missing something, as usual?


> I think that
>you are conflating how to contest *racism* with how to contest the idea of
>*meritocracy*. To contest meritocracy, it makes sense to say that low
>levels of mental capacity do not justify consigning the mentally disabled
&
>those who don't do well in formal schooling to the rubbish heap of
society.
>To contest scientific racism, in contrast, we have to struggle to counter
>the idea that race is a meaningful category in studies of mental capacity,
>for the very foundation of scientific racism is the premise that race is a
>_cause_ of differences in intelligence, which in turn explains differences
>in economic achievement.

This is an important distinction, but I don't think Justin's conflating it. I think he's actually keeping it very clear. He's attacking a position which depends on [scientific racism plus meritocracy], by attacking meritocracy, rather than scientific racism. Since he's not a scientist, what would one have him do?

dd

___________________________________________________________________________

_____

---------------------------------------------------------

This email is confidential to the ordinary user of the

e-mail address to which it was addressed. If you are not

the intended recipient, please notify the sender

immediately on (44) 20 7638 5858 and delete the message

from all locations in your computer. You should not copy

this email or use it for any purpose, or disclose its

contents to any person : to do so may be unlawful.

Email is an informal method of communication and is

subject to possible data corruption, either accidentally

or on purpose. Flemings is unable to exercise control

over the content of information contained in

transmissions made via the Internet. For these reasons

it will normally be inappropriate to rely on information

contained on email without obtaining written confirmation

of it.

----------------------------------------------------------



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list