Society/Culture The Grievance Studies Hoax - 'Applied Postmodernism' in Scholarship and Higher Education

[Scallop Industry Thug]

Both.

There's no serious comparison. There isn't even a real thing that is Indigenous science.

What are you basing that on?

 

[ShanDog]

To show support for possible future Indigenous co-workers/students? I don't know.

I'm more in support of Universities having the option to learn and keep record of Indigenous history. And to employ Indigenous people. And to show our society that we consider them equals.

It could all be an exercise in virtue signalling. But I think it's sending the right message for the right reasons.

What's the worst that could possibly come of this? Because I think it could be pretty good in some areas.


Excellent, that's what I took from the article.


I don't think it's a focus on white privilege.
And it would depend on how it was discussed.

I believe that I have had advantages in my life, that many Indigenous people have not. So my understanding of 'white privilege' is based on that.
What's the corrupted concept, and who teaches it?


What is that, and who is distancing themselves from it? Have they said why?

Unconscious bias, to me, sounds like a human condition.
I've seen people not even look through a resume after seeing a strange name. I've seen people openly talk about avoiding hiring Indigenous, because they are "lazy and unreliable".

Is unconscious bias connected to sterotypes or something like that?


If it can be done, I'd love to see it.
From my limited understanding of Indigenous science, I'd struggle to really seem them as equal. But I've never had the opportunity to learn more about it.

How much do you know about Indigenous science? Do we know it isn't compatible?


Again, if it's done well I believe this could be pretty good.

Everything always has 'worst case scenarios'. But do we have to jump at them?

I'm (supposed to be) working at the moment and these questions need a bit more time to answer properly so I'll get back to you on them, but some short answers:

Implicit bias is a thing but nowhere near as influential as made out. Mostly because we are conscious and capable of rationality to at least some degree. Recent studies have rubbished the effects of implicit bias training (i.e. efforts to reduce implicit bias) because they don't work and, in some cases, the results showed that people got worse at it afterwards.

The original conception of white privilege by McIntosh was an ethnographic account (dubious but a valid form of knowledge to some degree) that brought up some interesting ideas but was still quite full of holes and fallacies. However, it was slowly adopted as canon and has since been "built on" further and further (which reminds me of the three little pigs story...). The current use of the term by the vast majority of people outside academia bears little resemblance to the original idea too.

I can't say I know anything about indigenous science but, to be frank, the very idea seems ridiculous, and to relate it to the thread, reminds me of the Grievance Studies paper on making feminist astrology a part of the science of astronomy. Oh how we laughed at such a silly idea... That might be the cynic in me talking but we'll see I guess.

 

[ShanDog]

What are you basing that on?

If it's scientific, it's scientific.

Reminds me of people who claim naturopathic medicines are real medicines etc because "essence of rose bush" has painkilling properties (not a real example) without realising that all modern drugs are is studied and tested essences of rose bush...

 

[Frank Bunn]

De-colonisation theories are extremely dubious in scope and application (IMO) and mixing indigenous science with modern science sounds like an epistemological dumpster fire in the making. But sure, I'm all for academic heterodoxy so best of luck to them in that area. Hopefully no bad ideas like those I mentioned before come out of that and become part of the curriculum though...

Examples of Aboriginal 'science'.

Physics: Aboriginal people developed the boomerang and other sophisticated weapons

Astronomy : An Emu in the Sky over Paranal

Navigation: How could they traverse this great continent without compasses, but using stars and oral maps?

Landcare: Aboriginal people managed country carefully through controlled burning to maximise productivity.

Chemistry: Aboriginal people had an intimate knowledge of bush medicine, and how to treat poisonous plants to make them usable for food or medicine.

Warfare: They organised fierce resistance to the British invaders, and sometimes won significant military victories such as the raids by Aboriginal warrior Pemulwuy or Jandamarra.

Aboriginal knowledge for the science curriculum

School News is the definitive portal for the education industry providing a valuable and informative resource for decision makers in Primary, Secondary and Intermediate Schools throughout Australia. The print and digital edition is delivered directly, on a quarterly basis, toover 17,200 key...

www.school-news.com.au

 

[its free real estate]

If indigenous science counts as science then so does astrology and alchemy.

 

[ShanDog]

Examples of Aboriginal 'science'.

Physics: Aboriginal people developed the boomerang and other sophisticated weapons

Astronomy : An Emu in the Sky over Paranal

Navigation: How could they traverse this great continent without compasses, but using stars and oral maps?

Landcare: Aboriginal people managed country carefully through controlled burning to maximise productivity.

Chemistry: Aboriginal people had an intimate knowledge of bush medicine, and how to treat poisonous plants to make them usable for food or medicine.

Warfare: They organised fierce resistance to the British invaders, and sometimes won significant military victories such as the raids by Aboriginal warrior Pemulwuy or Jandamarra.

Aboriginal knowledge for the science curriculum

School News is the definitive portal for the education industry providing a valuable and informative resource for decision makers in Primary, Secondary and Intermediate Schools throughout Australia. The print and digital edition is delivered directly, on a quarterly basis, toover 17,200 key...

www.school-news.com.au

All things which are explained through modern science, which makes the studying of indigenous science seem more like a socio-cultural study (a form of new historicism?) rather than actual science.

 

[CM86]

I'm (supposed to be) working at the moment and these questions need a bit more time to answer properly so I'll get back to you on them, but some short answers:

Cheers

Implicit bias is a thing but nowhere near as influential as made out. Mostly because we are conscious and capable of rationality to at least some degree. Recent studies have rubbished the effects of implicit bias training (i.e. efforts to reduce implicit bias) because they don't work and, in some cases, the results showed that people got worse at it afterwards.

I've had a look at Implicit/unconscious bias. It's not entirely what I thought it was.
But if the training is just to make sure you're not holding on to stereotypes, and that we're all aware of them. Is that bad?

I think we've all had to sit through a meeting that goes over things you've know nearly your whole life?

The original conception of white privilege by McIntosh was an ethnographic account (dubious but a valid form of knowledge to some degree) that brought up some interesting ideas but was still quite full of holes and fallacies. However, it was slowly adopted as canon and has since been "built on" further and further (which reminds me of the three little pigs story...). The current use of the term by the vast majority of people outside academia bears little resemblance to the original idea too.

Well if it's actually bad for society I agree it shouldn't be taught. Do we really know what they will be dealing with in terms of that though?
Maybe I'm not across white privilege. But from what I understand of it, it does exist in some areas for some people.
It shouldn't be a battle line, or identity. Just an understanding that not everyone is as lucky or unlucky as everyone else.

I can't say I know anything about indigenous science but, to be frank, the very idea seems ridiculous, and to relate it to the thread, reminds me of the Grievance Studies paper on making feminist astrology a part of the science of astronomy. Oh how we laughed at such a silly idea... That might be the cynic in me talking but we'll see I guess.

That's a bit harsh, but would be a shared view around Australia.
You've said you don't know anything about Indigenous science, but are still judging it as vastly inferior.

And we think that due to observations over time. We haven't seen Indigenous science cure polio, or design airplanes, or land on the moon.
Science began as philosophy. Can't we explore ideas of Indigenous philosophy?

Is it that bad to give Indigenous science a platform to be judged on? Instead of us judging it as we have... without actually have any idea about it.

 

[CM86]

Examples of Aboriginal 'science'.

Physics: Aboriginal people developed the boomerang and other sophisticated weapons

Astronomy : An Emu in the Sky over Paranal

Navigation: How could they traverse this great continent without compasses, but using stars and oral maps?

Landcare: Aboriginal people managed country carefully through controlled burning to maximise productivity.

Chemistry: Aboriginal people had an intimate knowledge of bush medicine, and how to treat poisonous plants to make them usable for food or medicine.

Warfare: They organised fierce resistance to the British invaders, and sometimes won significant military victories such as the raids by Aboriginal warrior Pemulwuy or Jandamarra.

Aboriginal knowledge for the science curriculum

School News is the definitive portal for the education industry providing a valuable and informative resource for decision makers in Primary, Secondary and Intermediate Schools throughout Australia. The print and digital edition is delivered directly, on a quarterly basis, toover 17,200 key...

www.school-news.com.au

All things which are explained through modern science, which makes the studying of indigenous science seem more like a socio-cultural study (a form of new historicism?) rather than actual science.

That's an opinion piece written by Jens Korff.


I've no idea who that is, and nothing he has written has given me reason to believe he knows more about Aboriginal science than you or I.

 

[Frank Bunn]

All things which are explained through modern science, which makes the studying of indigenous science seem more like a socio-cultural study (a form of new historicism?) rather than actual science.

And yet we embed teaching Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Histories and Cultures in the curriculum for English, Maths and Science.

https://www.australiancurriculum.ed...orres-strait-islander-histories-and-cultures/

 

[ShanDog]

I've had a look at Implicit/unconscious bias. It's not entirely what I thought it was.
But if the training is just to make sure you're not holding on to stereotypes, and that we're all aware of them. Is that bad?

I think we've all had to sit through a meeting that goes over things you've know nearly your whole life?

I object to implicit bias training for several reasons, some of which I mentioned, but also because it's seen by some as a panacea for racism/sexism etc and also comes with an accusatory predication. That sort of thing is just not helpful (specifically in practice or generally as an approach to fixing issues). It, and other mandatory training of a similar nature, are a waste of time and resources. But that's a minor complaint really, since I don't like working hard at the best of times and any excuse to not work sounds great. Except maybe that...

Well if it's actually bad for society I agree it shouldn't be taught. Do we really know what they will be dealing with in terms of that though?
Maybe I'm not across white privilege. But from what I understand of it, it does exist in some areas for some people.
It shouldn't be a battle line, or identity. Just an understanding that not everyone is as lucky or unlucky as everyone else.

Similar to implicit bias, the way it is incorrectly applied grinds my gears. Having said that I acknowledge that people can argue that where the theory has moved to is just a natural process of building the knowledge but I think it's just gone further down the unhelpful and incoherent rabbit hole. Again, as per the discussion and ideas used by the hoaxers, white privilege is a catch-all concept that you can't even argue about. As James Lindsay has pointed out, if you argue against it, it's used as proof you have it. It's like the old saying about crazy people - they always deny they are crazy and that's the first sign they are. It's a mess.

As I mentioned though, there were some good ideas in the original piece, as flawed as it was. Seems to me that academia has glossed over them and decided to focus on the most out-there parts though. Worth reading the original yourself - it's not long really. And re: identity - that's the problem with white privilege and other similar theories. They are all wedded to group identity as the primary conception of who you are, and it's why IMO the foundation of much of those study areas is build on sand.

That's a bit harsh, but would be a shared view around Australia.
You've said you don't know anything about Indigenous science, but are still judging it as vastly inferior.

And we think that due to observations over time. We haven't seen Indigenous science cure polio, or design airplanes, or land on the moon.
Science began as philosophy. Can't we explore ideas of Indigenous philosophy?

Is it that bad to give Indigenous science a platform to be judged on? Instead of us judging it as we have... without actually have any idea about it.

It is harsh and I'm speculating, but to the best of my understanding, if what's studies is scientifically sound, then it's just science. I don't see how a new category of indigenous science works except as a loose descriptive term. And in that case it should be something else to reflect that it isn't some form of new or different scientific method. If they argue it is one, then OK... But unless they can somehow show it is more valid or produces better results than the post-enlightenment scientific method, I really don't see how it has a place. I suppose a niche differential form of knowledge creation is fine for a university, but I'm not expecting anything interesting to come of it.

 

[ShanDog]

And yet we embed teaching Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Histories and Cultures in the curriculum for English, Maths and Science.

https://www.australiancurriculum.ed...orres-strait-islander-histories-and-cultures/

Yes, I'm pretty familiar with the Australian Curriculum. ATSI culture and history can be used across the curriculum pretty easily in many areas. Some are harder, like maths and science. But then again there are always ways to relate it to the subject - the examples above in that article show how. Boomerang or backburning for science, the structure of Dreamtime stories for English etc.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

And yet we embed teaching Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Histories and Cultures in the curriculum for English, Maths and Science.

https://www.australiancurriculum.ed...orres-strait-islander-histories-and-cultures/

Indigenous oral narratives, visual narratives and contemporary Indigenous lit is easily embedded in the curriculum. Im not sure why you have an issue with this?

In regards to Maths, the description from your very own link indicates existing skills learnt will be applied to investigate issues relevant to Indigenous people.

 

[medusala]

Yeh we’ve got a post modern Leader of the Free World.

The most dangerous thing to escape from Unis in the last 100 years was Fred Hayek, Uncle Milty and the Chicago Boys - who built the ideological foundations of the GFC - which has in turn lead to austerity politics and the consequent turn to nationalism

Comrade, please. That is nonsense. You really think that Hayek gets much of a run in universities? No, its all about the Jew hater and his quack theory. Likewise its absurd to blame the GFC on Milt.

Thatcher was the last one to actually believe in Hayek. Since then its all been magic money tree drivel.

 

[FireKrakouer]

How about we finish curing cancer etc before dedicating endless resources to not offending snowflakes.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

How about we finish curing cancer etc before dedicating endless resources to not offending snowflakes.

C'mon.

 

[eastfreo75]

No but he had certain views about race purity.. and he was a generation younger that GBS. The very paragon of democracy against tyranny. It's an argument against a view that you can't read Fabian Socialist theory because they were eugenisits

My son just sent me this - he comes across Jordy worshipping clowns at Uni all the time. its instructive as to your conscious or unconscious rhetoric style:

Lol

The author just described how extreme left tactics are.

 

[Contra Mundum]

Lol

The author just described how extreme left tactics are.

Your trolling now - I get it. It’s like the Matrix in here - no one has a real identity


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Contra Mundum]

Comrade, please. That is nonsense. You really think that Hayek gets much of a run in universities? No, its all about the Jew hater and his quack theory. Likewise its absurd to blame the GFC on Milt.

Thatcher was the last one to actually believe in Hayek. Since then its all been magic money tree drivel.

Alan Greenspan literally ****ed Ayn Rand mate - then he became then he became the Director of the Fed


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[medusala]

Alan Greenspan literally f’ed Ayn Rand mate - then he became then he became the Director of the Fed

Greenspan was disowned by that sort a long time ago. This sort of thing became inevitable post Bretton Woods.

I can still recall the utter nonsense I was taught at uni re economics. Its madness. Better off just to read Wealth of Nations.

 

[eastfreo75]

Your trolling now - I get it. It’s like the Matrix in here - no one has a real identity


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

Both the left and right label people and change the goal posts as a tactic not to listen.

Not sure why you think the left are holier thou.

 

[Frank Bunn]

All things which are explained through modern science, which makes the studying of indigenous science seem more like a socio-cultural study (a form of new historicism?) rather than actual science.

I think Aboriginal culture should be taught in Australian high schools but not by inserting it into core subjects such as maths and science. For sure, Indigenous people gained knowledge and truths about the world but they did not follow the scientific method. There's evidence they had basic oral and finger counting systems but that is not mathematics. English is slightly different. As you mentioned, the structure of Dreamtime stories could be incorporated in English classes. But I would argue that the different aspects of Aboriginal culture(s) should be taught together to form a coherent view of how they lived and thought.

 

[Scallop Industry Thug]

I think Aboriginal culture should be taught in Australian high schools but not by inserting it into core subjects such as maths and science. For sure, Indigenous people gained knowledge and truths about the world but they did not follow the scientific method. There's evidence they had basic oral and finger counting systems but that is not mathematics. English is slightly different. As you mentioned, the structure of Dreamtime stories could be incorporated in English classes. But I would argue that the different aspects of Aboriginal culture(s) should be taught together to form a coherent view of how they lived and thought.

The Maths curriculum is using Indigenous places and people as case studies to apply existing Maths concepts to. Go back and have a read of it. The kids learn how to do mapping, in the conventional way. They might go out to an Indigenous cultural site and apply those skills there.

 

[Steinfreo]

I remember listening to a radio interview with someone that set up the school curriculum in NZ, the incorporation of Maori culture into even stem subjects has been pretty successful over there. they like go, this plant is significant to maori culture in this way, maybe they make paint out of the flowers or something. Then they look at the plant under the micro scope and explain photosynthesis. Wheres the harm in that. This is the impression I get with the difference between Maoris and Indigenous, over here we basically smashed them and almost entirely annihilated them, so they have not right to have representation in our education system other than that, in NZ the Maori beat the British back and forced a truce so they deserve representation. Thats the impression I get anyway.

I dont understand why anyone would give a s**t about units taught at uni, everything is optional so if you dont like it dont take it.

 

[Frank Bunn]

The Maths curriculum is using Indigenous places and people as case studies to apply existing Maths concepts to. Go back and have a read of it. The kids learn how to do mapping, in the conventional way. They might go out to an Indigenous cultural site and apply those skills there.

There's no value in relating modern mathematical concepts to Indigenous culture. Same with science.

What's your problem with teaching Indigenous culture as a separate coherent subject?

 

[ShanDog]

There's no value in relating modern mathematical concepts to Indigenous culture. Same with science.

What's your problem with teaching Indigenous culture as a separate coherent subject?

Use an entire subject line for that? For how many years during school? Why not just the occasional incorporation into the existing curriculum? Your solution sounds harder and more involved than the perceived problem.