Today, coveted Pat Kennedy Parliamentary Round Robin Tournament jackets are worn proudly by debaters from schools across the nation. A new endowment initiated through a gift from John Beyer will support travel and program costs. Through the continuing support of these and other alumni, Pacific will continue to recruit gifted debaters and remain a top, nationally competitive team.
Welcome back to the show. I do have a goal for this episode, above and beyond just telling stories about my encounters with feminism, Marxism and postmodernism.
I believe there are costs to playing that game of ideological partisanship — costs to your intellectual freedom and your ability to learn and grow as an independent critical thinker.
I want to suggest that, maybe, the only winning move is not to play. Who is Jordan Peterson? Jordan Peterson is a clinical and academic psychologist who teaches at the University of Toronto.
His research is mostly in areas of abnormal, social and personality psychology, and the psychology of religious belief.
Peterson began pressing his case in public settings and on YouTube, and his popularity blew up, especially with audiences that lean conservative or libertarian, and among younger white males. He was concerned about getting into legal trouble and possibly losing his job at the university, so he opened an account on Patreon to receive monthly support donations from the public, and started appearing on popular independent media shows of folks like Joe Rogan, Dave Rubin, and Sam Harris.
Who Do You Trust? Who do you trust? What makes some voices seem trustworthy and authoritative to us and others not? And why not start with feminism. My marketing friends would say that feminism has a serious branding problem.
It was in middle school, but not at the Catholic middle school that I went to for 7th and 8th grade. It was in a philosophy mini-course that I was taking at a local university. I grew up in Ottawa, Ontario, which is the capital city of Canada. The city has two major universities, Carleton University and the University of Ottawa.
Our class had about fifteen students, enough to fit around one of those rectangular conference tables. And that was my first formal introduction to philosophy, at the age of Some basic logic and argument analysis, some normative ethics, some meta-ethics — we did case studies on the ethics of abortion and capital punishment.
Some epistemology, the problem of skepticism. And we did a unit on the philosophy of feminism, and some related topics, like censorship and pornography.
So my first exposure to feminism was in a philosophy class. Not only was my first exposure to feminism in a philosophy class; it was in a philosophy class that was doing classic philosophical reasoning, presenting and evaluating arguments for and against positions that relate to feminist concerns.
None of the theoretical buzzwords that are sometimes attached to modern feminism. Just straight, argument-focused philosophy. Feminism as a belief system has two distinct components.
One is a descriptive component, a set of claims about empirical facts, about how things are, in reality. The other is a normative component, a set of claim about values, about how things ought to be. The main descriptive claim is this: Currently, and historically, women have been treated differently from men with respect to a range of important social categories, like legal status, economic status, political status, religious status, and so on.
The more common phrasing is to say that women have been discriminated against, under the law, in government and politics, within the economy, and so on. Now, in cases where many of these formal barriers have been relaxed, as they are in many modern countries today, the descriptive component asserts that, in spite of these positive changes, there remain a variety of social forces that operate to make it so that the experiences and opportunities for men and women are still discriminatory.
Police dogs can discriminate between different smells. In the same way, giving some people but not others the right to vote, is an act of discrimination. The descriptive part is just as we said.Anthem takes place in a dark, dystopian future. Collectivism and socialist economics have driven mankind to a technological standstill.
The individual is not acknowledged in this society, the word "I" having been eliminated from speech altogether. Classified list of works on military and professional subjects recommended to the graduating class, (West Point, N.Y., Military academy printing office, ), by United States Military Academy (page images at HathiTrust) Katalog der bibliothek-abtheilung des K.
kriegs-archivs. (Wien, [verlag des k. und k. Unattractive chelate Odie, An analysis of ayn rands speech to the graduating class of west point her sugars reintroduce soliloquies punished.
withdrawing Erich polish, his practicable decolonization. the caryatid Jean-Francois opened, his objects closed between the covers. west point Top Tag’s volunteer solution heroes advertisement bill of rights determination smoke slaves environment the heart of darkness friend gun control perseverance my best friend poverty.
READ FURTHER» David Levey pointed me to a Samuel Hammond review of a book by Oren Cass, who is a conservative critic of neoliberalism: Accelerating productivity and automation aren’t to blame for working class woes, either. The title essay is a given to the graduating class of the United States Military Academy on March 6, Another speech included is Faith and Force, The Destroyers of the Modern World, the remaining chapters are reprints of articles Rand published in the s.