Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (38392)	8/18/2002 12:11:27 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I'm not much of a multiculturalist, as you see. I am probably multiculturalist lite. Tattoos are fine, beheading is not. Strange sex practices are OK, as long as everyone is over the age of eighteen, and consents. I don't care what you eat, as long as it was never human, is not presently alive, was never capable of higher thought, and was no one's family pet. Slavery is verboten, tying each other up is fine as long as it's just kinky.

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (38392)	8/18/2002 11:40:57 AM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

The strong-weak distinction for multiculturalism is a strange one. It does have the benefit, from your point of view, of saying something like this. The view of multiculturalism that I think is the right view--all these things called "culture", whatever that is, can never be judged from their exterior and must be judged holistically, not in terms of objectionable parts. That view, you argue, while objectionable in and of itself, as least has the courage of consistency. Then there is, in your view, the weak argument, in which you hold on to the view that this thing you are calling "culture" is holistic and must be judged in its totality or not at all and never from its exterior. But some folk simply don't have the courage of their convictions, so when confronted with some obviously horribly objectionable practices within this thing you are calling a culture, they object to them. But they are hypocrites to do so because they've just contradicted their view. Most likely you are quoting some extant views and if I ask you for sources, you will pop them up. Fine. I don't doubt one can find odd views for anything. You wish to use India as an illustration; I wish to use the American southwest. Kumar will have to argue with you about India; I've not read seriously enough to do so. Let me repeat that the only philosophical place one can ever have a problem with my Southwestern illustrations is if one believes (a) there are universals; (b) they are knowable; (c) "cultures" are holistic entities; and (d) one must make totalistic judgments about them, on the order of bad culture, good culture. Again, I will also repeat that my approach to these issues derives from Richard Rorty's work.