Alt Text
Show parent replies
i’ll read the full paper later tonight after i recover a bit, i’m ofc very interested in the topic. but i think this basically shows the dead end of epistemic-exclusive realist ideology critique
as in, we’re humans yea, and we do mean things to animal guys, yea. vicious circularity in justification real likely. but like there’s not a lot to really glean from that, because it’s not just likely or suspect there’s just no alternative. idk maybe paulo will prove me wrong, i imagine ill end up
re-reading rossi too now that i have some more time apart, but im just really not inspired by this methodology
this is what i kinda meant here. epistemic rad realism is too flat and one-sided in service of remaining on solid analytical footing, and it suffers for it
idk ideology in this sense is just way less interesting because it's just the powerful deluding themselves
"animals, unlike humans, are unable to contest speciesist and anthropocentrist legitimation stores, not because they are in the lower rungs of the social order, but because they lack the relevant contestatory capacities. their disempowerment, then, is not enforced but constitutive." 🤨
speak more on that bro because uh constitutive of what. this is why i was hella sussed out by "for obvious reasons" above, like idk chief maybe lay that out because i don't trust you lol
this is fucking WEIRD dude
enforced and constiutive are such crude and not at all exhaustive ways of getting any understanding of power. how am i supposed to trust you with ideology critique when this is the best you got. "disempowered" is such a narrow starting place