Monday, June 22, 2020


All of Critical Theory is based on Motte-and-Bailey Arguments.

And it’s turtles all the way down


DOuglas2 said...

I've no idea who James Lindsay is but I saw a reference to a podcast he spoke on: where this idea is developed.

It doesn't become interesting until about 35 minutes or more in, and has a lot of repetition, but fortunately it is on youtube so one can play it at 1.75* speed.

His point is that those imbued with Critical Theory are reliant upon the liberal's adhering to the principle of charity, so we focus on and work to form agreement with the stuff in the motte, because that is the bit that we can make sense of. But by focusing on the motte, on forming our thought that a good chunk of what is being said is stuff that we can agree with, we are distracted from the bailey, which is often subjective and irrational.

His solution is that those in such discussions must identify the motte and the bailey asap, acknowledge the motte with charity, but "bomb the heck out of" the bailey.

Assistant Village Idiot said...

Thanks. I'll give it a look

DOuglas2 said...

I see that there's a synpopsis of sorts at the webpage for the podcast:

The author is one of the academics who was part of that 'new Sokal hoax' project.

PenGun said...

LOL. Here ya go. Tell me where he is wrong, and why. ;)

Assistant Village Idiot said...

What does that have to do with my topic?

Some people find that a little caffeine helps them keep their focus, Pen Gun.