What are your thoughts re Hegelian Dialectic & CRT in the Church?

[JohnH]

So, is it true or not?

It seems a teacher would need to be more motivated to try harder with kids from backgrounds that don’t value education, not the opposite like you implied.

I gave you an example of how culture (and not genetics) can be a basis for racism and racist attitudes. Namely a belief in cultural inferiority rather than genetic inferiority.

I'm not suggesting that most teachers share those attitudes. But some bad ones do.

That sounds like the teacher’s problem.

I don’t see anything racist or racism involved with recognizing some kids are from backgrounds where parents don’t value education much.

Some groups of white peope don’t, either. It is pretty easy to accurately stereotype such people too. Or just observe when their kids are chronically absent / tardy

[Ken]

So, is it true or not?

It seems a teacher would need to be more motivated to try harder with kids from backgrounds that don’t value education, not the opposite like you implied.

I gave you an example of how culture (and not genetics) can be a basis for racism and racist attitudes. Namely a belief in cultural inferiority rather than genetic inferiority.

I'm not suggesting that most teachers share those attitudes. But some bad ones do.

That sounds like the teacher’s problem.

I don’t see anything racist or racism involved with recognizing some kids are from backgrounds where parents don’t value education much.

Some groups of white peope don’t, either. It is pretty easy to accurately stereotype such people too. Or just observe when their kids are chronically absent / tardy

You are missing my point.

There is nothing necessarily racist about genetics either. It is universally taught in HS biology and everyone acknowledges that there are genetic differences in the human genome. We all have our own unique DNA and we are not all clones of each other (unless we have an identical twin). But using genetics as a reason to discriminate between races, or to claim that genetics is the reason why Black students perform lower on average than White students is using a racist explanation for the disparity.

Likewise with culture. To use Black culture as a reason to discriminate between the races, or to claim that Black culture is the reason why Black students perform lower on average than White students, is using a racist or race-based explanation for the disparity. You are judging people and making conclusions about their academic performance or potential based on the color of their skin.

And just because there may be actual correlations between culture and school performance doesn't mean it isn't a race-based explanation. Or that it can be used as grounds for discrimination. For generations, decision-makers have done things like underfund or eliminate college prep programs in majority Black schools and instead track students into vocational training because they assume the community doesn't value academics or that the students won't be capable of achieving because of their culture. What George Bush called "the soft bigotry of low expectations". He recognized it as a form of bigotry or racism. But turning the ship is very hard work. And in education you really have to start in preschool so it takes generations.

None of this is easy. Hard problems never are. And education is one of the hardest. There are really many multiple inter-connected factors at play. Culture, poverty, geography, Biases within and without the educational system, and yes, a legacy of systemic racism going back centuries. It is all interconnected. None of these factors act in isolation. But we are unlikely to make headway without understanding how we got to where we are. CRT is a part of that. It is simply a tool for examining how biases or racism has creeped into institutions even when the people working in those institutions are not necessarily racist themselves.

But of course none of this excuses or takes the agency away from individual students and individual families. We are all responsible for our own choices and actions both as parents and as students. But it does help us understand how the playing field is still tilted in a myriad of complicated ways. And that is not something we should tolerate in a free society in which "all men are created equal" and "equal protection under the law" are principles enshrined in our founding documents. That does not mean we would ever expect equality in outcomes. That is biologically and socially impossible. But we can work towards more equality in opportunity.

[HondurasKeiser]

I gave you an example of how culture (and not genetics) can be a basis for racism and racist attitudes. Namely a belief in cultural inferiority rather than genetic inferiority.

I'm not suggesting that most teachers share those attitudes. But some bad ones do.

That sounds like the teacher’s problem.

I don’t see anything racist or racism involved with recognizing some kids are from backgrounds where parents don’t value education much.

Some groups of white peope don’t, either. It is pretty easy to accurately stereotype such people too. Or just observe when their kids are chronically absent / tardy

You are missing my point.

There is nothing necessarily racist about genetics either. It is universally taught in HS biology and everyone acknowledges that there are genetic differences in the human genome. We all have our own unique DNA and we are not all clones of each other (unless we have an identical twin). But using genetics as a reason to discriminate between races, or to claim that genetics is the reason why Black students perform lower on average than White students is using a racist explanation for the disparity.

Likewise with culture. To use Black culture as a reason to discriminate between the races, or to claim that Black culture is the reason why Black students perform lower on average than White students, is using a racist or race-based explanation for the disparity. You are judging people and making conclusions about their academic performance or potential based on the color of their skin.

And just because there may be actual correlations between culture and school performance doesn't mean it isn't a race-based explanation. Or that it can be used as grounds for discrimination. For generations, decision-makers have done things like underfund or eliminate college prep programs in majority Black schools and instead track students into vocational training because they assume the community doesn't value academics or that the students won't be capable of achieving because of their culture. What George Bush called "the soft bigotry of low expectations". He recognized it as a form of bigotry or racism. But turning the ship is very hard work. And in education you really have to start in preschool so it takes generations.

None of this is easy. Hard problems never are. And education is one of the hardest. There are really many multiple inter-connected factors at play. Culture, poverty, geography, Biases within and without the educational system, and yes, a legacy of systemic racism going back centuries. It is all interconnected. None of these factors act in isolation. But we are unlikely to make headway without understanding how we got to where we are. CRT is a part of that. It is simply a tool for examining how biases or racism has creeped into institutions even when the people working in those institutions are not necessarily racist themselves.

But of course none of this excuses or takes the agency away from individual students and individual families. We are all responsible for our own choices and actions both as parents and as students. But it does help us understand how the playing field is still tilted in a myriad of complicated ways. And that is not something we should tolerate in a free society in which "all men are created equal" and "equal protection under the law" are principles enshrined in our founding documents. That does not mean we would ever expect equality in outcomes. That is biologically and socially impossible. But we can work towards more equality in opportunity.

Equating culture with race is where you seem to be talking past John. There are multiple and sundry cultures that are comprised of black people. Here in Honduras there are 2 entirely different black cultures composed of black people from two very different origins. One of the cultures is know for its staidness, conservatism, work-ethic and aloofness from others - they tend to belong to a very conservative Church of God denomination. The other is known to be more charismatic, Catholic, partiers and dabbling in animism and witchcraft. Obviously there are outliers, individuals that buck the norm and a spectrum of acculturation within the community members. Nevertheless, the cultures continue to exist as unique human experiments because they successfully transmit their values, perspectives, mores and ways of being on to the next generation. It seems to me to be a rather banal observation that:
a. Cultural values, insofar as they are imbibed and practiced by a person, necessarily affect how one goes through life. (We who have grown up in a very Mennonite culture should understand this as well as any sociologist.)
b. All cultures have some values that, when put into practice, lend themselves to destruction and death instead of success and life.

Freud grasped that 100 years ago.

[JayP]

Ken, you are certainly entitled to an opinion. But that is all you have got with CRT…an opinion.
I th8nk adding it to the mix to try to solve problems makes more…not less. Also an opinion.

Lots of opinions seem to carry a lot of weight these days.
They tell us to “trust the science”. I do not see any science that indicates gender exists separately from biological sex. But that is not stopping it. Go do what you would like with public education. It is doomed for so many reasons anyway that I don’t suppose a dose of CRT will do any harm. I am with Pontius Pilate.

[Ken]

That sounds like the teacher’s problem.

I don’t see anything racist or racism involved with recognizing some kids are from backgrounds where parents don’t value education much.

Some groups of white peope don’t, either. It is pretty easy to accurately stereotype such people too. Or just observe when their kids are chronically absent / tardy

You are missing my point.

There is nothing necessarily racist about genetics either. It is universally taught in HS biology and everyone acknowledges that there are genetic differences in the human genome. We all have our own unique DNA and we are not all clones of each other (unless we have an identical twin). But using genetics as a reason to discriminate between races, or to claim that genetics is the reason why Black students perform lower on average than White students is using a racist explanation for the disparity.

Likewise with culture. To use Black culture as a reason to discriminate between the races, or to claim that Black culture is the reason why Black students perform lower on average than White students, is using a racist or race-based explanation for the disparity. You are judging people and making conclusions about their academic performance or potential based on the color of their skin.

And just because there may be actual correlations between culture and school performance doesn't mean it isn't a race-based explanation. Or that it can be used as grounds for discrimination. For generations, decision-makers have done things like underfund or eliminate college prep programs in majority Black schools and instead track students into vocational training because they assume the community doesn't value academics or that the students won't be capable of achieving because of their culture. What George Bush called "the soft bigotry of low expectations". He recognized it as a form of bigotry or racism. But turning the ship is very hard work. And in education you really have to start in preschool so it takes generations.

None of this is easy. Hard problems never are. And education is one of the hardest. There are really many multiple inter-connected factors at play. Culture, poverty, geography, Biases within and without the educational system, and yes, a legacy of systemic racism going back centuries. It is all interconnected. None of these factors act in isolation. But we are unlikely to make headway without understanding how we got to where we are. CRT is a part of that. It is simply a tool for examining how biases or racism has creeped into institutions even when the people working in those institutions are not necessarily racist themselves.

But of course none of this excuses or takes the agency away from individual students and individual families. We are all responsible for our own choices and actions both as parents and as students. But it does help us understand how the playing field is still tilted in a myriad of complicated ways. And that is not something we should tolerate in a free society in which "all men are created equal" and "equal protection under the law" are principles enshrined in our founding documents. That does not mean we would ever expect equality in outcomes. That is biologically and socially impossible. But we can work towards more equality in opportunity.

Equating culture with race is where you seem to be talking past John. There are multiple and sundry cultures that are comprised of black people. Here in Honduras there are 2 entirely different black cultures composed of black people from two very different origins. One of the cultures is know for its staidness, conservatism, work-ethic and aloofness from others - they tend to belong to a very conservative Church of God denomination. The other is known to be more charismatic, Catholic, partiers and dabbling in animism and witchcraft. Obviously there are outliers, individuals that buck the norm and a spectrum of acculturation within the community members. Nevertheless, the cultures continue to exist as unique human experiments because they successfully transmit their values, perspectives, mores and ways of being on to the next generation. It seems to me to be a rather banal observation that:
a. Cultural values, insofar as they are imbibed and practiced by a person, necessarily affect how one goes through life. (We who have grown up in a very Mennonite culture should understand this as well as any sociologist.)
b. All cultures have some values that, when put into practice, lend themselves to destruction and death instead of success and life.

Freud grasped that 100 years ago.

My point is this:

Culture isn't necessarily race. There are an infinite variety of cultures on this planet that do not relate to race. Anabaptist culture as you point out.

Likewise, genetics isn't necessarily race. There is an infinite variety within the human genome and the few genes that determine skin color are but an infinitesimal fraction of the total.

However, if we attribute lower average Black academic achievement to either racial genetics, or some racially-identifiable Black culture then we are attributing lower Black achievement to race. These are what I am calling racist explanations. That doesn't mean they are necessarily right or wrong, simply that they are race-based explanations. Either way we are taking a Black child and saying we expect him do do worse than White children because of the color of his skin. And if that bias translates into discriminatory policies (and it does) then that is wrong.

Look, I would be the first to agree that family culture has an enormous impact on academic success. And that is true no matter what the race or ethnicity of the child. And that we can and do identify characteristics of what we might call African-American culture that affect student success I don't think anyone who spends more than a moment examining these issues would conclude otherwise. But what are we really seeing when we do that? Are we seeing the effects of poverty and attributing them to race? Are we seeing the effects of historic discrimination and attributing them to race? Are we seeing the effects of geography and attributing them to race? Are we seeing the effects of religion and attributing them to race? Are we seeing the effects of inequalities in the criminal justice system and attributing them to race? Are we seeing the effects of a toxic mass media and social media environment that particularly affects Black students? Or are we seeing the echoes of distant cultural differences between Africa and Europe that still reverberate today? Or is it all of the above?

In the end, when you start pulling at threads on this topic you find out they are all connected which is why these sorts of issues are so difficult to attack and address. Is systemic racism as explained by CRT part of the picture? Of course. It is absurd to claim otherwise because there are so many absolutely concrete examples we can point to going back generations. Is it the only factor? Of course not. Which is why any attempt to address academic achievement, poverty, crime, unemployment, family structure, or anything else in the Black community is going to require a multi-faceted approach. It isn't all just racism and victimhood. Nor is it all just cultural laziness, lack of initiative, poor work ethic, poor morals, etc. It is really all of the above. We are never going to see equality of outcomes. Nor should we seek it. But what we can and should do is stop tilting the playing field in one direction or the other and do our best to provide equality of opportunity. We have made a lot of progress towards that goal in the past 50-75 years. But we still have a long ways to go.

[JohnL]

I’ve been reading this thread and no matter which way I look at it I come back to the same conclusions and questions.

How I see Hegelian dialectics where there’s a thesis and antithesis being chewed over in order to reach a synthesis becomes a kind of locked in culture where the need to constantly debate something becomes more important than trusting God and his Word. At some point sincere Christian disciples have to just trust God’s teachings even if they don’t understand them.

Any time there’s a discussion of moral standards there’s always someone rationalizing Biblically immoral behaviors under the smokescreen of “dialogue”. They prefer talking it to death instead of simply obeying God’s Word.

Are they continually beating these immorality topics to death because they don’t want to face their own sins? Because they want to control the churches who stand on the Bible? Because they want to be the center of attention as some kind of famous reformer out to save the churches from themselves? That’s just another variety of socialism and communism, it’s not Christianity.

Why do churches fall for this “dialogue and debate” culture? Is it because the folks who want a compromised church walk use the guilt ploy to trick the churches into thinking it’s unchristian to stand firm on the clear Bible teachings?

Whatever happened to listening to Jesus’ words
In Revelation 3?

15 I know your works, that you are neither cold nor hot. I could wish you were cold or hot. 16 So then, because you are lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will vomit you out of My mouth.

[barnhart]

JohnL, I think the situation you describe is real but I don't think it is CRT or Hegelian. To me that sounds like old fashioned faithlessness.

[Bootstrap]

Ken, you are certainly entitled to an opinion. But that is all you have got with CRT…an opinion.

I don't think CRT is an opinion. I think it is a methodology. It looks at systems to see if they create racial disparities, whether or not the people in those systems intend to create disparities.

As the NAACP puts it:

Critical Race Theory recognizes that racism is embedded in laws, policies and institutions that uphold and reproduce racial inequalities.

What the systems actually do is more important than what the people say they feel. If a system does not uphold and reproduce racial inequalities, it is not racist. If it does, it is. Two different people can analyze the same system and come up with different conclusions, but that''s true of most methodologies. Instead of treating CRT as evil, I think it would make more sense to take a system like public schools, prisons, the War on Crime, and ask if it upholds and reproduces racial disparities. There will be more than one opinion, but it's a discussion that can be tied to facts.

But this is where "in the church" seems really strange to me. Do people really do this kind of analysis in the church?

[JohnL]

JohnL, I think the situation you describe is real but I don't think it is CRT or Hegelian. To me that sounds like old fashioned faithlessness.

I see it as both are used as a rationalization for faithlessness. The wolves of prideful arrogance have many disguises including sheep.

Obedience to the Bible’s teachings is simple. Getting pride out of the way to live out that obedience is hard so many excuses are deployed, many in the disguise of “superior understanding” including the use of Hegelian debates on any topic including CRT.

[Bootstrap]

... many in the disguise of “superior understanding” including the use of Hegelian debates on any topic including CRT.

I have to admit—I don’t really know what all that fancy language means. Could you explain it a bit?

I completely agree that simple obedience to Scripture should be at the center of what we do. I hadn’t thought about Hegel since college, and I’m still not entirely sure what CRT is. But I’m trying to understand.

I don’t see how CRT becomes a “rationalization for faithlessness.” If there are systems that end up hurting people unfairly, wouldn’t it be a good thing to understand those systems and work to fix them? How does that lead someone away from faith?

I’m not trying to argue—just trying to see what you’re seeing.