It doesn’t. The reason why the communist society of the Soviet Union is because it wasn’t the right time. Next time it will be the “correct “ socialist society…. It’s a theory of anarchy. It will continue to plague society as long as China keeps influencing our universities
It is very much an " ism " and like all other examples in history , it has led to pain and destruction equal or greater than the thing it was attempting to "fix."
*Ha! You think the two are mutually exclusive? They are intimately linked, which is why when bad ideas are implemented in politics, it tends to draw ire.*
It would be nice for you to develope such as simplist and naive comment, at least as a first reaction. But if You know more of it beyond this video I promise to analize your arguments. Saludos desde México 👍🏽
@@AbsurdityViewer I'm still waiting for an argument. I'm a sociologist and I like thinkers such as Fromm Marcuse, Horkheimer but reading something doesn't make it true, nor being an expert makes You or me or anyone flawless. I hope not to sound rude. I also think I didn't make myself clear about "a first reaction". I was talking about myself by thinking it was a "naive comment" without having more arguments to support that statement. I think judging this as a resentment theory highlights just an element that is not as important as the fact that setting this adjective (it's a noun but it's really being used as an adjective for "theory") induces to take away any critical thinking about our society in order to not to feel odd. It makes easier for people who don't want to read and find out about these ideas for themselves, which I don't agree on everything but I find valuable to reveal a lot of invisible chains.
@@maryoalexei4493 western society and frankly all societies, have been able to 'critically' analyse their social processes quite well before the Frankfurt 'fellows' showed up. Otherwise there would have been no progress in methods and systems, which there obviously was; ergo... they 'criticized their efforts without theorizing 'criticism' since ancient times Bards and Minstrels would sing simple little rhymes to spread the news of the land... people would look forward to being entertained by these 'entertainer/reporters' and would continue to sing their 'songs' long afterward. The people could do nothing about the news but continue on with their lives but the knowledge of events was kept in their songs. The Frankfurt School of Resentment discovered that Marx was wrong about his conclusions about 'struggle' (funny how egotistical narcissists always talk about the struggle... my struggle, our struggle) many of their 'observations' are correct; especially about consumerism and media; but there conclusions are wrong. They know how society should function but those darn pesky societyites just won't conform to our theories and predictions! so they abandon their marxist rebellion and find a different way to culturally manipulate and deviate society away from it's natural trajectory. When they don't get 'their way' they 'resent' the people who are not as smart as them... the natural constituents of this manipulation are those who resent the success of others in their life... the only people who can seek 'success' are the cultural marxists. then success is ok. privilege
Marx may have been right about the results of unequal power but to imagine that successful people are purely motivated by power is to misunderstand humanity. To imagine that equal power and equal finance for all would somehow fix social ills or motivate people to improve their lives is unrealistic. If we scrap hierarchies of merit and introduce universal basic income then a few who are already motivated will become more creative, the rest will find it hard to get out of bed.
CRT obviates the need for any thought, word or act of racism as proof of their presumed verdict. All they need is their preferred race measuring less favorably than another. Regardless of the cause: they declare their favored race to be victims of the other. Then they would use real government enforced discrimination in response to their presumed discrimination; altering laws, policies and practices to favor their preferred race. All for the stated purpose of forcibly making the measurements between races identical. The operative question is whether you support using government force to implement racial discrimination. All the rest is academic. My answer is no.
Non critical think rules your world, does it not? When you attack something that you can't or won't define in real terms, nor provide examples for with genuine intellectual honesty, you're creating a strawman argument which you can easily defeat. Your wall of words steems from the deconstruction of white supremacy and toxic masculinity from the previous construct where white people, men in particular, created a false narrative of the Superman ideal, the benevolent and honorable hero. In reality, the white male trope is more like Lex Luthor, the inglorious and ignoble villian. You feel strong when you're destroying, subjuging, or profiting at someone else's expense. In other words, you exercise the full extent of life, liberty, and happiness when you're doing the polar opposite to someone else. You believe that life is a zero sum competition, your either winning or loosing. Think whatever you want, just try to do it more critically, and with genuine intellectual honesty. The 5 Steps to Critical Thinking: What is critical thinking? In general, critical thinking refers to actively questioning statements rather than blindly accepting them. Critical thinking results in radical free will. 1. The critical thinker is flexible yet maintains an attitude of healthy skepticism. Critical thinkers are open to new information, ideas, and claims. They genuinely consider alternative explanations and possibilities. However, this open-mindedness is tempered by a healthy sense of skepticism (Hyman, 2007). The critical thinker consistently asks, “What evidence supports this claim?” 2. The critical thinker scrutinizes the evidence before drawing conclusions. Critical thinkers strive to weigh all the available evidence before arriving at conclusions. And, in evaluating evidence, critical thinkers distinguish between empirical evidence versus opinions based on feelings or personal experience. 3. The critical thinker can assume other perspectives. Critical thinkers are not imprisoned by their own points of view. Nor are they limited in their capacity to imagine life experiences and perspectives that are fundamentally different from their own. Rather, the critical thinker strives to understand and evaluate issues from many different angles. 4. The critical thinker is aware of biases and assumptions. In evaluating evidence and ideas, critical thinkers strive to identify the biases and assumptions that are inherent in any argument (Riggio & Halpern, 2006). Critical thinkers also try to identify and minimize the influence of their own biases. 5. The critical thinker engages in reflective thinking. Critical thinkers avoid knee-jerk responses. Instead, critical thinkers are reflective. Most complex issues are unlikely to have a simple solution. Therefore, critical thinkers resist the temptation to sidestep complexity by boiling an issue down to an either/or, yes/no kind of proposition. Instead, the critical thinker expects and accepts complexity (Halpern, 2007). Critical thinking is not a single skill, but rather a set of attitudes and thinking skills. As is true with any set of skills, you can get better at these skills with practice. In a nut shell, critical thinking is the active process of minimizing preconceptions and biases while evaluating evidence, determining the conclusions that can be reasonably be drawn from evidence, and considering alternative explanations for research findings or other phenomena. CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS >Why might other people want to discourage you from critical thinking? >In what situations is it probably most difficult or challenging for you to exercise critical thinking skills? Why? > What can you do or say to encourage others to use critical thinking in evaluating questionable claims or assertions?
Just like many things nowadays (now I sound old), your answer seems (to me) reactive and not critical. One of your premises seems to be that your experience of CRT is universal. Another of your premises seems to be that your understanding of CRT is comprehensive. My experience and understanding suggest you have not used critical thinking, which is at the heart of all forms and manifestations of critical theory. What are your arguments for such blanket statements?
@@jennabeth6851 because Marxism has obviously never worked and the only thing its good for is creating revolution… that always seems to open the floodgates for despots and tyrants
@@jennabeth6851 Because Reality is not a construction of power relations between classes as proposed by Karl marx. Reality is objective, feelings and views are subjective.
@@kaberigomes2117 Marx would not disagree with you there, Marx was a materialist and used that lens analysis. How looked at the material roots of things, then examine the the effects for the interactions between the phenomena which often meant looking into social structures and class relations. Marx was not an idealist & believed scientific, dialectical, materialist analysis. His observations were rooted in material, not feeling
@@moyasuFGC Bro i think you couldn't comprehend what i said. I never said Karl marx looked at things through lenses of feelings. I said Karl marx theory that society is built on power relationships between classes is false - or simply not based on reality of systems in place. Hence critical theory to overcome social structures through which people are oppressed is also irrational and unethical.
Fundamental principles of a theory being wrong make everything that follow wrong. There is no such thing as objective equality. The whole idea that power structures decide everything to take them down would make everything equal is absurd. I would like to be taller, I'm not. Height is one of the best predictors of success, should I know strive for all 6 foot people to cut off 20% of their legs? It's absurd. There are a near-infinite amount of variables that influence your path in life, most of which are biological or genetic. These are almost never taken into account is, it's insane. And if they are it's about societies biases towards them. As if there is no such thing a evolution or natural selection. CT seeks to narrow it down to power because it suits their arbitrary chosen premisse of what constitutes justice, reality & norms. They are the Goth's of science: juvenile, profoundly middle-class privileged & not for anything just against everything. What are you, 14 years old?
This explanation is concise, clear and professional. I like it very much.
Fantastic explanation. Thank you!
Very nice explanation. Thank you.
nice presentation! can i know what application did u used?
Egalitarianism is not a means in itself.
I came across this video because of a class for uni, but I work in learning experience design. And I saw the animations and was like yvond!!!
When does critical approach end? How does one recognize that he arrived at the fundamental reasons things happen the way the happen?
It doesn’t. The reason why the communist society of the Soviet Union is because it wasn’t the right time. Next time it will be the “correct “ socialist society…. It’s a theory of anarchy. It will continue to plague society as long as China keeps influencing our universities
I think 'critical' in this sense, is more critique than vital. a continuous critical assessment of your situation rather than approaching some crisis.
does the critical theory provide any real solution to the problem?
or does it just view the system from a marxist pov?
Thanks for the video - it helped me better understand my university BA work. Sorry people are being so weird and confrontational in the comments.
It is very much an " ism " and like all other examples in history , it has led to pain and destruction equal or greater than the thing it was attempting to "fix."
Where is Freire?
Waaaaaay too many people in the comments are here for political statements and not for philosophical research.
do you base that response on Critical Theory principles?
*Ha! You think the two are mutually exclusive? They are intimately linked, which is why when bad ideas are implemented in politics, it tends to draw ire.*
Thanks bGood video. Please buy a better mic though!
You buy them one
It was okay wdym
Begin with the desired answer.
Assume the chosen answer is correct.
Apply the answer to the data.
SCIENCE!/s
Critical theory should be called Resentment Theory
It would be nice for you to develope such as simplist and naive comment, at least as a first reaction. But if You know more of it beyond this video I promise to analize your arguments. Saludos desde México 👍🏽
@@maryoalexei4493 critical theory in effect, is resentment theory. not a first reaction... a student of history and all things natural.
@@AbsurdityViewer I'm still waiting for an argument. I'm a sociologist and I like thinkers such as Fromm Marcuse, Horkheimer but reading something doesn't make it true, nor being an expert makes You or me or anyone flawless. I hope not to sound rude. I also think I didn't make myself clear about "a first reaction". I was talking about myself by thinking it was a "naive comment" without having more arguments to support that statement. I think judging this as a resentment theory highlights just an element that is not as important as the fact that setting this adjective (it's a noun but it's really being used as an adjective for "theory") induces to take away any critical thinking about our society in order to not to feel odd. It makes easier for people who don't want to read and find out about these ideas for themselves, which I don't agree on everything but I find valuable to reveal a lot of invisible chains.
@@maryoalexei4493 western society and frankly all societies, have been able to 'critically' analyse their social processes quite well before the Frankfurt 'fellows' showed up. Otherwise there would have been no progress in methods and systems, which there obviously was; ergo... they 'criticized their efforts without theorizing 'criticism'
since ancient times Bards and Minstrels would sing simple little rhymes to spread the news of the land... people would look forward to being entertained by these 'entertainer/reporters' and would continue to sing their 'songs' long afterward. The people could do nothing about the news but continue on with their lives but the knowledge of events was kept in their songs.
The Frankfurt School of Resentment discovered that Marx was wrong about his conclusions about 'struggle' (funny how egotistical narcissists always talk about the struggle... my struggle, our struggle)
many of their 'observations' are correct; especially about consumerism and media; but there conclusions are wrong. They know how society should function but those darn pesky societyites just won't conform to our theories and predictions!
so they abandon their marxist rebellion and find a different way to culturally manipulate and deviate society away from it's natural trajectory. When they don't get 'their way' they 'resent' the people who are not as smart as them... the natural constituents of this manipulation are those who resent the success of others in their life... the only people who can seek 'success' are the cultural marxists. then success is ok.
privilege
Y ou forgot the Race
Critical race theory is critical theory applied to race. Like gender theory is critical theory applied to gender.
Marx may have been right about the results of unequal power but to imagine that successful people are purely motivated by power is to misunderstand humanity. To imagine that equal power and equal finance for all would somehow fix social ills or motivate people to improve their lives is unrealistic. If we scrap hierarchies of merit and introduce universal basic income then a few who are already motivated will become more creative, the rest will find it hard to get out of bed.
Complete bollox
I appreciate the video and the explanation but yes, bollox in it's truest form.
CRT obviates the need for any thought, word or act of racism as proof of their presumed verdict. All they need is their preferred race measuring less favorably than another. Regardless of the cause: they declare their favored race to be victims of the other.
Then they would use real government enforced discrimination in response to their presumed discrimination; altering laws, policies and practices to favor their preferred race.
All for the stated purpose of forcibly making the measurements between races identical.
The operative question is whether you support using government force to implement racial discrimination.
All the rest is academic.
My answer is no.
Non critical think rules your world, does it not?
When you attack something that you can't or won't define in real terms, nor provide examples for with genuine intellectual honesty, you're creating a strawman argument which you can easily defeat.
Your wall of words steems from the deconstruction of white supremacy and toxic masculinity from the previous construct where white people, men in particular, created a false narrative of the Superman ideal, the benevolent and honorable hero.
In reality, the white male trope is more like Lex Luthor, the inglorious and ignoble villian. You feel strong when you're destroying, subjuging, or profiting at someone else's expense.
In other words, you exercise the full extent of life, liberty, and happiness when you're doing the polar opposite to someone else. You believe that life is a zero sum competition, your either winning or loosing.
Think whatever you want, just try to do it more critically, and with genuine intellectual honesty.
The 5 Steps to Critical Thinking:
What is critical thinking?
In general, critical thinking refers to actively questioning statements rather than blindly accepting them.
Critical thinking results in radical free will.
1. The critical thinker is flexible yet maintains an attitude of healthy skepticism.
Critical thinkers are open to new information, ideas, and claims. They genuinely consider alternative explanations and possibilities. However, this open-mindedness is tempered by a healthy sense of skepticism (Hyman, 2007).
The critical thinker consistently asks, “What evidence supports this claim?”
2. The critical thinker scrutinizes the evidence before drawing conclusions.
Critical thinkers strive to weigh all the available evidence before arriving at conclusions. And, in evaluating evidence, critical thinkers distinguish between empirical evidence versus opinions based on feelings or personal experience.
3. The critical thinker can assume other perspectives.
Critical thinkers are not imprisoned by their own points of view. Nor are they limited in their capacity to imagine life experiences and perspectives that are fundamentally different from their own. Rather, the critical thinker strives to understand and evaluate issues from many different angles.
4. The critical thinker is aware of biases and assumptions.
In evaluating evidence and ideas, critical thinkers strive to identify the biases and assumptions that are inherent in any argument (Riggio & Halpern, 2006). Critical thinkers also try to identify and minimize the influence of their own biases.
5. The critical thinker engages in reflective thinking.
Critical thinkers avoid knee-jerk responses. Instead, critical thinkers are reflective. Most complex issues are unlikely to have a simple solution. Therefore, critical thinkers resist the temptation to sidestep complexity by boiling an issue down to an either/or, yes/no kind of proposition. Instead, the critical thinker expects and accepts complexity (Halpern, 2007).
Critical thinking is not a single skill, but rather a set of attitudes and thinking skills. As is true with any set of skills, you can get better at these skills with practice.
In a nut shell, critical thinking is the active process of minimizing preconceptions and biases while evaluating evidence, determining the conclusions that can be reasonably be drawn from evidence, and considering alternative explanations for research findings or other phenomena.
CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS
>Why might other people want to discourage you from critical thinking?
>In what situations is it probably most difficult or challenging for you to exercise critical thinking skills? Why?
> What can you do or say to encourage others to use critical thinking in evaluating questionable claims or assertions?
Just like many things nowadays (now I sound old), your answer seems (to me) reactive and not critical. One of your premises seems to be that your experience of CRT is universal. Another of your premises seems to be that your understanding of CRT is comprehensive. My experience and understanding suggest you have not used critical thinking, which is at the heart of all forms and manifestations of critical theory. What are your arguments for such blanket statements?
@@KRW66
I'm merely reflecting what CRTists have told me.
I am glad that you also disagree with them.
Critical theory is irrational and unethical.
Why do you think it is unethical?
@@jennabeth6851 because Marxism has obviously never worked and the only thing its good for is creating revolution… that always seems to open the floodgates for despots and tyrants
@@jennabeth6851 Because Reality is not a construction of power relations between classes as proposed by Karl marx. Reality is objective, feelings and views are subjective.
@@kaberigomes2117 Marx would not disagree with you there, Marx was a materialist and used that lens analysis. How looked at the material roots of things, then examine the the effects for the interactions between the phenomena which often meant looking into social structures and class relations. Marx was not an idealist & believed scientific, dialectical, materialist analysis. His observations were rooted in material, not feeling
@@moyasuFGC Bro i think you couldn't comprehend what i said.
I never said Karl marx looked at things through lenses of feelings. I said Karl marx theory that society is built on power relationships between classes is false - or simply not based on reality of systems in place. Hence critical theory to overcome social structures through which people are oppressed is also irrational and unethical.
Marx was a magical thinker, and so are the rest of them. Let's make up some bs to make us seem relevant
Well yes, these guys are absolute losers, they failed in their initial pursuit and formed a philosophy based on resentment and delusion.
Fundamental principles of a theory being wrong make everything that follow wrong. There is no such thing as objective equality. The whole idea that power structures decide everything to take them down would make everything equal is absurd.
I would like to be taller, I'm not. Height is one of the best predictors of success, should I know strive for all 6 foot people to cut off 20% of their legs? It's absurd.
There are a near-infinite amount of variables that influence your path in life, most of which are biological or genetic. These are almost never taken into account is, it's insane. And if they are it's about societies biases towards them. As if there is no such thing a evolution or natural selection. CT seeks to narrow it down to power because it suits their arbitrary chosen premisse of what constitutes justice, reality & norms.
They are the Goth's of science: juvenile, profoundly middle-class privileged & not for anything just against everything.
What are you, 14 years old?
Give me your tired, your poor, Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free, The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
nice poem; someone should put that on a statue somewhere... thankfully just a statue and not law.