White? Dont teach here. Op Updated to address false 'racist' labal

[dank69]

/this

there is a reason i am not arguing with him. No matter what i say he will twist to fit his desire to continue to call me a racist.

why you guys continue to argue with him...

Where did I call anyone other than SA a racist? I didn't. So you are the one twisting words.

 

[justoh]

Holy fuckballs. It doesn't.

Because he needed a statement he thought was equal in order to extend the logic. The first equal example he could think of was firing black history teachers.

So? Can't we say things we don't believe?

 

[realibrad]

/this

there is a reason i am not arguing with him. No matter what i say he will twist to fit his desire to continue to call me a racist.

why you guys continue to argue with him...

I like to understand how people think. Understanding other people's thoughts helps me deal with others. I saw something that did not follow to me, so I dug deeper.

It usually gets very convoluted and indeed it did here as well.

Lol, but thanks for letting me use you for my own gains.

 

[werepossum]

Holy fuckballs. It doesn't.

Because he needed a statement he thought was equal in order to extend the logic. The first equal example he could think of was firing black history teachers.

The first equal example he could think of was firing black history teachers as an example of the absurdity of the protesters' logic.

I understand the protesters' point - this is not so much an academic course as a self-worth booster - but accepting it as a valid principle requires either accepting that blacks are simply inherently superior, able to understand and empathize with whites whereas whites are unable to do the same, or accepting that a teacher can only identify with and teach about people with the same skin color. Remember, the history of blacks and Hispanics in America is an intricate part of American history, not something that was experienced in a vacuum. (Which is rather fortunate as it would have been either unpleasantly loud or quite difficult to breathe.)

I can also support the protesters' point to a point, but there's an inherent flaw in that line of thinking. If you teach children that only people with the same skin tone (or at the least, only minorities) can teach them black and Hispanic history, then you've conditioned children to believe that their skin color (and/or minority status) defines them. And if you teach them that only blacks or minorities can do some things, they must either become racists or suspect that there must similarly be things that only whites can do. Neither of those are good things.

 

[dphantom]

I agree with Waggy's conclusion, that race has no bearing on ability to teach any subject, as I have written countless times in this thread. Why are you so bad at reading? Why do you have to ask me a question I have already answered over and over?

Insulting others wins you no debate points. :\ I was simply trying to clarify what to many of us was a rather confusing series of responses from you.

 

[justoh]

Dank seems like an ok guy

 

[dank69]

The first equal example he could think of was firing black history teachers as an example of the absurdity of the protesters' logic.

Yes. He extended their absurd logic by using a comparable (equal in his mind) statement.

I understand the protesters' point - this is not so much an academic course as a self-worth booster - but accepting it as a valid principle requires either accepting that blacks are simply inherently superior, able to understand and empathize with whites whereas whites are unable to do the same, or accepting that a teacher can only identify with and teach about people with the same skin color. Remember, the history of blacks and Hispanics in America is an intricate part of American history, not something that was experienced in a vacuum. (Which is rather fortunate as it would have been either unpleasantly loud or quite difficult to breathe.)

I can also support the protesters' point to a point, but there's an inherent flaw in that line of thinking. If you teach children that only people with the same skin tone (or at the least, only minorities) can teach them black and Hispanic history, then you've conditioned children to believe that their skin color (and/or minority status) defines them. And if you teach them that only blacks or minorities can do some things, they must either become racists or suspect that there must similarly be things that only whites can do. Neither of those are good things.

The rest of this is discussion about the merits of the protesters' logic which is not germane to my point, as I pretty much agree with your line of thinking.

 

[dank69]

So? Can't we say things we don't believe?

Of course we can. But we aren't talking about what he said. We are talking about what he has to believe in order to make the comparison he did. If you want, I can attempt walk you through it with a simple yes/no question and answer process.

 

[justoh]

Yes. He extended their absurd logic by using a comparable (equal in his mind) statement.


The rest of this is discussion about the merits of the protesters' logic which is not germane to my point, as I pretty much agree with your line of thinking.

Whether or not it's germane probably doesn't depend on your opinions. Just how awesome do you think you are? How arrogant. Or maybe just really awesome.

 

[justoh]

Of course we can. But we aren't talking about what he said. We are talking about what he has to believe in order to make the comparison he did. If you want, I can attempt walk you through it with a simple yes/no question and answer process.

What he has to believe in order to make the comparison? What do you mean exactly? Do you mean it's so creative that it must have come from the heart?

 

[dank69]

Whether or not it's germane probably doesn't depend on your opinions.

I'm just covering all my bases because here in P&N lala land if I just snipped out the part that wasn't relevant to what I am saying someone will inevitably say I edited it because I don't want to deal with countering evidence or I'm ignoring context.

Just how awesome do you think you are? How arrogant. Or maybe just really awesome.

I'm glad you asked. I'm pretty fucking awesome if I do say so myself. :thumbsup:

 

[dank69]

What he has to believe in order to make the comparison? What do you mean exactly? Do you mean it's so creative that it must have come from the heart?

I mean if you think that B follows from A you have to believe that A and B are comparable, no?

 

[justoh]

I mean if you think that B follows from A you have to believe that A and B are comparable, no?

oh

edit: fine, so what are you comparing and why? I've just noticed your kind offer to walk me through it.

 

[justoh]

Lol we all win indeed.

Its almost time for lunch, and I am hungry. I think I got out of this what I wanted.

I wish we had a way of making notes that only I could see or create to remember situations like this. I feel like dank and I are on the same page about religion, but this was awful.

I guess it was worth it for all the abuse. Still seems ok. I guess, just, really confident. Such an unassuming avatar too. It's like, idiot this. Stupid that. Retarded this. Doesn't really make for an intellectually safe environment.

 

[dank69]

oh

edit: fine, so what are you comparing and why? I've just noticed your kind offer to walk me through it.

Okay then, let's start at the beginning. I'll try to frame my questions to require simple yes/no responses. First we should get all the bullshit out of the way if possible, so here are my positions, again:

I know Waggy thinks white people can be qualified to teach African-American, Latino and Southeast Asian studies.
I know Waggy thinks black people can be qualified to teach American History.

Do you understand the following? (Yes/No)

DanK knows Waggy thinks white people can be qualified to teach African-American, Latino and Southeast Asian studies.
DanK knows Waggy thinks black people can be qualified to teach American History.

 

[justoh]

Okay then, let's start at the beginning. I'll try to frame my questions to require simple yes/no responses. First we should get all the bullshit out of the way if possible, so here are my positions, again:

I know Waggy thinks white people can be qualified to teach African-American, Latino and Southeast Asian studies.
I know Waggy thinks black people can be qualified to teach American History.

Do you understand the following? (Yes/No)

DanK knows Waggy thinks white people can be qualified to teach African-American, Latino and Southeast Asian studies.
DanK knows Waggy thinks black people can be qualified to teach American History.

Wait. That sounds about right. So we square?

edit: got me. sorry. Yes. hot damn you're good.

 

[dank69]

Wait. That sounds about right. So we square?

edit: got me. sorry. yes. hot damn you're good.

So that is a Yes? You understand? Good, next:

I know that Waggy doesn't think race makes any difference when it comes to who can or cannot teach any subject.

Do you understand the following? (Yes/No)

DanK knows Waggy doesn't think race makes any difference when it comes to who can or cannot teach any subject.

 

[justoh]

So that is a Yes? You understand? Good, next:

I know that Waggy doesn't think race makes any difference when it comes to who can or cannot teach any subject.

Do you understand the following? (Yes/No)

DanK knows Waggy doesn't think race makes any difference when it comes to who can or cannot teach any subject.

Oh, there's more. Okay. Yes. Could you not capitalize the K on your name, as it's very distracting. Sorry if i seem petty. I'm concentrating here. Also, that's more a comment on the low bar we have for teachers these days. what must I believe to have made this statement?

 

[dank69]

Oh, there's more. Okay. Yes. Could you not capitalize the K on your name, as it's very distracting. Sorry if i seem petty. I'm concentrating here.

Don't worry buddy, I'm not trying to trick you or anything. I'm not going to switch a letter or word for some sort of gotcha moment. Just for you, I won't capitalize the K though.

Next:

Was Waggy's primary purpose for post 18 to illustrate why he thinks the protesters are wrong? (Yes/No)

 

[justoh]

Don't worry buddy, I'm not trying to trick you or anything. I'm not going to switch a letter or word for some sort of gotcha moment. Just for you, I won't capitalize the K though.

Next:

Was Waggy's primary purpose for post 18 to illustrate why he thinks the protesters are wrong? (Yes/No)

Let me check.

Oh, that post. I honestly don't know. Is it important? Hmm. Fine, assume it was. Yes. I honestly would have gone with no. That's my gut choice. But then the questions stop?

second edit: sorry i can't. No. final answer. Hope it doesn't derail anything.

 

[SpatiallyAware]

Who cares?? Is this a waggy witch hunt ?

 

[dank69]

Who cares?? Is this a waggy witch hunt ?

Nope. Educational exercise. This will only hurt a little.

 

[dank69]

Let me check.

Oh, that post. I honestly don't know. Is it important? Hmm. Fine, assume it was. Yes. I honestly would have gone with no. That's my gut choice. But then the questions stop?

No the questions do not stop, we fully explore the situation until we come to a consensus. Sound good?

I believe that was Waggy's intention. Let's look at it again:

On the flip side, Karen Crozier is implicitly saying that black teachers are incapable of teaching European history. How progressive of her.

exactly. so i guess they should fire every black history teacher (except for African-American, Latino and Southeast Asian studies).


I didn't know that the color of your skin dictated what history you could teach! Thanks karen!

Notice the sarcasm at the end. He is clearly making fun of Karen.

I believe Waggy's intention was to make fun of the protesters for being wrong. Do you agree? (Yes/No)

 

[justoh]

No the questions do not stop, we fully explore the situation until we come to a consensus. Sound good?

I believe that was Waggy's intention. Let's look at it again:

Notice the sarcasm at the end. He is clearly making fun of Karen.

I believe Waggy's intention was to make fun of the protesters for being wrong. Do you agree? (Yes/No)

Seems likely, but I don't know how much of a factor it was, and it doesn't seem relevant? Easy Yes though. Probably not primary.

 

[justoh]

sorry for the personal annotations. It may well end up being relevant. Just seems so unlikely. Am i in for a big surprise?