On Extremism: A Narrative is not a fact.

Forums:
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Consider the following narratives.

- America is a great country that has made significant progress on racial justice and has benefitted the world.

- America is a horrible country that was founded on racism. It is still rife with racial injustice and has supported oppression throughout the world.

- Women have been subjugated by men across cultures and throughout history.

- Indigenous cultures were wise and egalitarian.

- Every human being has a right to freedom, and longs for freedom.

These are Narratives, not facts They are all equally True in the sense that I can argue any of them from real facts.

Narratives are not fact-based. The Narratives we accept are based on our culture, our values and our identities. It is humanure to choose the facts to support our narrative, and reject facts that don't.

Mistaking Narrative as Truth leads to extremism. It the belief that you have the one true understanding and that other narratives are lies.

A fact is objective and objectively testable. For any fact I believe, I can tell you an objective way to change my mind (by disproving it). Facts exist free of value or judgement. A fact is correct (or not) based on things I can test objectively. If you can't find facts that question your narrative, then you aren't looking.

A narrative is not a fact.

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link to this Topic

Type: Question • Score: 0 • Views: 351 • Replies: 18

[+3] - hightor - 11/13/2021[quote]Are you saying that CRT is not a "fallacy argument" or are you saying that it is not distracting from the topic of the thread. [/quote] Both. [quote]This means teaching the...

@maxdancona,

When a narrative is questioned with facts, there are three different reactions.

1. Dialog. A dialog is when you question your own narrative by looking from another point of view, and present your narrative in a different context.

2. Circular reasoning. A narrative can always be made to be internally consistent (although sometimes contradictions must be ignored). If you are arguing the truth of your narrative starting with the assumption that your narrative is true... you will always end up in the same place.

3. Insults. A narrative can declare itself true by attacking any other perspective. This is unfortunately all too common, instead of trying to understand different points of view, it is far easier to demonize them.

0 Replies

This is all true.

0 Replies

maxdancona wrote:

Quote:

The Democrats just lost big races in Virginia and Pennsylvania (states that Biden won). The exit polls said that Critical Race Theory was a significant reason for voters to vote against the Democrats.

Real Music wrote to: maxdancona

Quote:

1. I've seen several news reports discussing how the topic of Critical Race Theory may have impacted the election results in Virginia.

2. I have not seen or heard any such news reports of Critical Race Theory having anything to do with the election results in Pennsylvania.

3. Yes, I've seen reports that said that the republicans did better than the democrats in Pennsylvania.

4. But, I haven't heard anything on the subject of Critical Race Theory being discussed as the reason.

5. I am referring to Pennsylvania.

6. It is possible that you may have seen some news reports that I have not seen.

7. What source do you have that has any mention of Critical Race Theory having anything to do with the Pennsylvania election results?

0 Replies

hypocrite (noun)
a person who indulges in hypocrisy.

Hypocrisy is the practice of engaging in the same behavior or activity for which one criticizes another or the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one's own behavior does not conform.

1 Reply

@Real Music,

I don't see why my alleged hypocrisy has anything do with the topic.

This thread is based on the thesis that a narrative is not a fact. Do you agree with my thesis or not?

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

1. Your hypocrisy is getting tiresome.
2. Let me try asking the question one more time:

What source do you have that has any mention of Critical Race Theory
having anything to do with the Pennsylvania election results?

1 Reply

@Real Music,

Your weird posts here have nothing to do with the topic at hand.

This thread presents the thesis that a narrative is not a fact, and that the confusion of narrative with facts contributes to extremism.

Do you care to comment on the topic?

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Quote:

Your weird posts here have nothing to do with the topic at hand.

1. I disagree
2. I am completely on topic.

Quote:

This thread presents the thesis that a narrative is not a fact

1. Exactly.
2. You appear to not have an answer for something that you yourself had posted.
3. So, let's try again to get you to answer the question I pose to you:

What source do you have that has any mention of Critical Race Theory
having anything to do with the Pennsylvania election results?

0 Replies

Let's talk about Education. This is a perfect example of two narratives. People on each side are more interested in attacking than in understanding the other side. Both in reality both sides have valid points.

- There the the desire to teach the difficult parts of history, including racism and slavery. This is (in my opinion) a valid goal.

- There is also the desire to have history support and inform political activism. This is more of a problem. A history class that supports a political movement such as Black Lives Matter without question is problem.

- There is the real concern that political ideology will inform what is being taught in the classroom. This isn't a good thing in my opinion, a good education is balanced.

The problem with extremism is that it pushes the "one true narrative" over all other narratives.

1) Someone can support the teaching of slavery and the history of racism in the US.

2) Someone can object to the promotion of political ideologies (such as Black Lives Matters) as part of history class.

These are both valid narratives. And someone can support both.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Quote:

And someone can support both.

On another thread you made an accusation against me:

Quote:

My impression is that you believe that one of these narratives represents an absolute Truth and that a teacher's job is to guide students to accept the one true Truth.

I don't know where you come up with this stuff. I never said that.

Quote:

If I am wrong about this (and you aren't saying this), then please tell me.

As usual, you're wrong. I never said that CRT was the "Absolute Truth" " – a useless term and not one which I use.

My point is that controversial issues can, and should, be discussed and that this is a better way of defusing or countering contentious points than allowing parents to dictate what and what not teachers are allowed to present to their students.

2 Replies

@hightor,

Hightor, CRT is a red herring.

The narrative is "America was founded on racism ... is still rife with racial injustice and supports oppression around the world".

If this is being presented in schools, particularly as a one sided narrative representing truth, than I see that as a problem. Do you?

1 Reply

@hightor,

The other narrative on which you and I have clashed is "Human beings are destroying the world and are on a path to self-destruction".

This is not a fact, it is a narrative.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

CRT is a red herring.

I don't think so: "A red herring is a fallacy argument that distracts from the original topic."

Quote:

If this is being presented in schools, particularly as a one sided narrative representing truth, than I see that as a problem.

I never suggested that it be presented in that fashion. I learned about Nazism and Soviet Communism in school, too.

Quote:

The other narrative on which you and I have clashed is "Human beings are destroying the world and are on a path to self-destruction".

But that's your take on the articles I post, not on my personal views. It would, however, be very possible for an objective observer looking at the COP-26 conference, to get the impression that humans will not be able to summon the collective willpower and mutual agreement necessary to enact the technical solutions to the destructive forces we have set in motion. Remember, articles on the climate crisis are warnings, discussing things which might be future possibilities, not historical events as we see in CRT.

2 Replies

@hightor,

Are you saying that CRT is not a "fallacy argument" or are you saying that it is not distracting from the topic of the thread. I think it is both.

0 Replies

@hightor,

If a teacher wants to address racial issues in a balanced way, then I am all for it. This means teaching the perspective that BLM is undermining police as well as teaching that BLM is supporting racial justice.

If you really mean that teachers should teach multiple perspectives, including conservative perspectives, then I am for it. Students should be taught to question both sides.

It is not OK if a teacher wants to teach his students to support BLM as an important racial justice movement. In that case a teacher is promoting a one sided political ideology rather than teaching students to think critically about a complex issue.

There is a difference.

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

I want to clarify one point. I am not making a "both sides argument". I was going to edit my last post which says "question both sides", because I guess that is what I mean... not teach both sides, but "question" any narrative including your own.

I am advocating for critical thinking. At the core of critical thinking is the ability to question your own narrative, and to view facts and valid arguments from different perspectives even when they don't fit your ideology.

Among the political left, there is a effort to shut out any point of view, or fact, that questions the predominant narrative even when they have objective merit.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

Are you saying that CRT is not a "fallacy argument" or are you saying that it is not distracting from the topic of the thread.

Both.

Quote:

This means teaching the perspective that BLM is undermining police as well as teaching that BLM is supporting racial justice.

No, that's not what should be taught. All points should be presented, if relevant, and discussed from multiple points of view. What's being taught is how to approach a controversial issue, not the truth or untruth of a particular viewpoint. As I said earlier, the best way to approach political hotpoints is to present as many ways of looking at the problem as possible. I remember being given an assignment where I had to argue from the point of view of Southern slave owners and another one where I had to present arguments which supported the Nazis.

On Extremism: A Narrative is not a fact.

Quick Links

My Account

able2know