PC students demand white philosophers be dropped from university syllabus

[Macaquerie]

Who are the non-white philosophers we need to be studying instead and why?

I mean, I am all for studying anything as long as we benefit from it.

But what is the reason to no longer study who we have been? Why can't we study all colors of philosophers?

If the goal is to learn more about African and Asian cultures, it would hardly be useful to study what white philosophers wrote on the topic, since they rarely had anything to say about non-European civilizations aside from orientalist (and whatever the equivalent is for Africa) drivel that is largely responsible for a lot of the biases and stereotypes we have about these areas today.

[Kalis]

Correct, but can you understand why philosophy students at the School of African and Oriental Studies might expect their world philosophy class to focus more on African and Oriental philosophies than European ones?

The course is World Philosophies, not African and Asian Philosophies. They have units that specialise in Asian and African philosophies, so there is already more focus on those areas.

The call is for white philosophers to be held to a different standard for inclusion than non-white philosophers, that is by definition racist.

[MonsieuRoberts]

Holy hell that's embarrassing.

[Deleted]

Ancient philosophy isn't relevant today.

[Vorkreist]

Hey, guys, how about you go studying to Africa instead?

They should go do gender and race equality studies in the middle east.

[Gsara]

Just think, your kids will be going to these colleges one day.

[Deleted]

Who is talking about dismissing anyone? Focussing more on non-European philosophers does not mean completely ignoring non-non-Europeans.

The students that want to change the curriculum.

Correct, but can you understand why philosophy students at the School of African and Oriental Studies might expect their world philosophy class to focus more on African and Oriental philosophies than European ones?

There is a class that spends time on African philosophy, and there is one that covers the philosophies of China or other countries. And all of those will need the basics to be taught too.

[Deleted]

SJWs proving once again they are the worst people

[Macaquerie]

SJWs proving once again they are the worst people

SJWs are worse than ISIS?

[Kuntantee]

If you remove "white philosophers", I am afraid nothing much is left.

[boccko]

Ancient philosophy isn't relevant today.

Go Team Wittgenstein?

[TheramoreIsTheBomb]

Race threads aren't allowed here.

[Dhrizzle]

The course is World Philosophies, not African and Asian Philosophies. They have units that specialise in Asian and African philosophies, so there is already more focus on those areas.

The call is for white philosophers to be held to a different standard for inclusion than non-white philosophers, that is by definition racist.

Actually the call is saying that European philosophers are already being held to a different standard for inclusion (hence the claims the courses are too eurocentric) so by your logic the courses are already racist.

- - - Updated - - -

The students that want to change the curriculum.

Can you show me where the students are saying that European philosophers should be completely omitted from their courses?

[Deleted]

If people want to stupefy themselves in the name of Identity Politics, they can be my guest.

You sound rather stupified yourself.

[Kalis]

Actually the call is saying that European philosophers are already being held to a different standard for inclusion (hence the claims the courses are too eurocentric) so by your logic the courses are already racist.

Can you link the part that makes the claim European philosophers are currently held to a different standard for inclusion? I can't find it on their list of 7 aims.

1. To hold events that will engage in a wider discussion about expressions of racial and economic inequality at the university, focussing on SOAS.
2. To address histories of erasure prevalent in the curriculum with a particular focus on SOAS’ colonial origins and present alternative ways of knowing.
3. To interrogate SOAS’ self-image as progressive and diverse.
4. To use the centenary year as a point of intervention to discuss how the university must move forward and demand that we, as students of colour, are involved in the curriculum review process.
5. To review 10 first year courses, working with academics to discuss points of revamp, reform and in some cases overhaul.
6. To make sure that the majority of the philosophers on our courses are from the Global South or it’s diaspora. SOAS’s focus is on Asia and Africa and therefore the foundations of its theories should be presented by Asian or African philosophers (or the diaspora).
7. If white philosophers are required, then to teach their work from a critical standpoint. For example, acknowledging the colonial context in which so called “Enlightenment” philosophers wrote within.

[Magical Mudcrab]

"The great philosophers" are basically all white, but it is fact that there are many great philosophers that weren't white. This group is going a bit too far saying majority should be African or Asian; however, there was another group that simply said there are other philosophers from around the world we should learn about them too.

Think about it like this... while Europe was in their dark ages the Middle East was having a golden age. If people were like "we should view this time solely as the dark ages just because Europeans were having a dark age, we should look around the world too." Is that such a terrible thing?

From what I can tell, UCL's philosophy classes are focused on the evolution of western philosophy, so there is a focus on historical western philosophers. While it's not necessarily a bad thing to modify the courses to allow for philosophers that aren't white0, including them because they're not while is incredibly stupid.

As a side note, the fact that the Middle East was in its golden age of enlightenment during the dark ages, which had resulted due to the fall of the Roman empire, which was a time in what is now Europe which was also arguably a golden age of enlightenment, is an incredibly banal point.

- - - Updated - - -

Race threads aren't allowed here.

No Nascar allowed?

[Dhrizzle]

If you remove "white philosophers", I am afraid nothing much is left.

You make a very good argument in favour of taking focus away from European philosophers.

- - - Updated - - -

Can you link the part that makes the claim European philosophers are currently held to a different standard for inclusion? I can't find it on their list of 7 aims.

https://soasunion.org/news/article/6...lonising-SOAS/

We are not asking for thinkers to be removed, but to be studied in their appropriate contexts and for our curricula to encompass perspectives which reflect the diversity of the world we live in.

To review our curricula by interrogating how colonialism has shaped what knowledge is considered canonical and what knowledge is considered ‘marginal’. In particular, we want to challenge the way in which people of colour and women of colour especially are underrepresented or entirely excluded from what is taught in universities.

[Zigrifid]

Just because they demanded it that doesnt mean it will happen (although i didnt read the article , i doubt it will happen).

[Yarathir]

Lol, that's pretty sad.

[Endus]

Can you link the part that makes the claim European philosophers are currently held to a different standard for inclusion? I can't find it on their list of 7 aims.

Then you simply aren't reading the list.

#2 is explicitly about the preferential standard for European philosophers. And #7 asks that they be held to the same critical standard any others are, rather than presuming their context as the "default setting".

It's not asking for any special consideration anywhere. It's asking for the Eurocentric preference to be ended, so that European philosophers stop getting that kind of unfair preferential consideration.