----- Original Message -----
From: "Joan Warmbold" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)"
<[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2007 2:24 PM
Subject: [tips] Re: Tuskegee :racist study
Sorry Michael but your post was a classic non-sequitur. Might work with
many white Americans who have every reason to feel shame and guilt about
the countless racist events in our history--up through Bushies taking
ex-cons off the voting polls. But Chris's comments about the Tuskegee
study were well cited and supported. If you feel you can reasonably
dispute folks comments about the cited study, go for it. But to dispute
listserv members' comments based on them not living in the US?? Totally
irrelevant.
Joan
Baloney is still baloney whether it comes from cited studies or so called
authoritative references. I may agree that someone who is not a part of the
system can present a more objective outlook,however not being a part of the
system can have certain disadvantages.I woild prefer the field studies
of Margaret Mead in Somoa anytime(She lived among the Somoans) to a treatise
presented by someone who never met a Somoan.
Let us not forget to differentiate between past and current validity.
One of the problems with this Eurocentric penchant for objectivity is the
isolation of the independent variable robs reality of real content.
And now we are going to analyze the Kitty Genovese event? I guess it never
happened.
Come on gimme a break.
Michael Sylvester,PhD
Daytona Beach,Florida
---
To make changes to your subscription go to:
http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english
