Alt Text
Show parent replies
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
"lacks the relevant psychological (cognitive and metacognitive) capacities required to contest legitimation stories"
i lowkey think ur a fascist
but beyond that this whole framing of like legitimation stories is all shit from the start I HATE YOU BERNARD WILLIAMS
i wish you were at least accidentally whimsical with him like the other guys, you leave it all implicit and its so ugly.
just like, imagine showing this paper to adorno and being like hey look i pointed out "bias", did i do a good ideology critique
lol the first objection addressed and yea idk its just so not satisfying. frankly embarrassing that an anonymous reviewer had to bring it to your attention and even worse that you just parrot enzo's line
like its fine? ish? but simply doesn't get us anywhere. the deck is just stacked in your favor because you said so. you're just giving the game away that you've decided ahead of time that the powerful are wrong. and yes, i will use the strong reading because there is no alternative to considering
them "wrong" when you count it as "debunking" and so unreliable as to be inadmissible. at least rossi et al cite some anthropology and history, this is just dorm room philosophy