Just for the record, "Chris" never made any comments about the Tuskegee
study. "He" finds the report by the historian that has been cited here
several times before by Stephen interesting, but "he" is also wary of
revisionists with an agenda. And "he" doesn't have enough interest in
the topic to find out whether this particular "revision" is an
even-handed reassessment or just an attempt to sweep an unpleasant
historical episode under the carpet (in the mold of holocaust deniers).
What Chris did comment on was Michael's easy willingness to decry
"racism" while, in the very same breath, dismissing others' opinions on
the basis of nothing more than their nationality. Principles must have
broader application or they are only so much self-serving "baloney."
Regards,
Chris Green
York U.
Toronto
===============
Michael Sylvester wrote:
----- 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
---
To make changes to your subscription go to:
http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english
