The abuses against the Indigenous American population were not racist.
Nor where the exploits of Britain, France et al in the age of empires - they were Imperialist.
Let's free ourselves from this racist BS - a racist is someone who believes in the superiority of one person over another based on racial factors.
Racists are 'bad people' but not all 'bad people' are racists. Get a grip...
Much truth and a little ignorance nets a bad result.
I'm as much for a restricted use of the lable racist as you are, but even I recognize the "racism" built into some imperialist projects. There are fascinating studies in justifying the colonial/imperialist projects on the grounds of "racial" superiority. Race, there, is given not as skin color, but as a broader view of culture that grabs nationality and religion especially. Milton rejects a great many of them in the Reason of Church Government and mocks others of them in Paradise Lost, but there are so many documents, especially out of England, that when they approach religion and economy, most definitely seek to establish rights based of a basically "racial" outlook.
One would assume, thereafter, that by accepting the correct God, the members of this race could then effectively become of the same race as the European father. This is repeatedly denied and stunningly unsuccessful over the course of N.American history. Race then would have to go back to some component of skin color, and the broader definition, though used to advance politics, does not rescue the indian from genocide.
It may be, as you say, that race definitions ought to be limited, they have in the past been so limited, or expanded, but ussually to suit a different purpose.
The answer to the thread title is "yes", to some degree all cultures are racially or otherwise biased towards outsiders and their culture.
The answer to the good professor that racism is somehow laced through every aspect of western culture, and that is why people dislike westerners, is a load of crap.
See also: Shetline is the man.
Finally: the most racist culture I've ever witnessed first-hand is decidedly eastern. Think Japan. While you won't see any burning crosses or rednecks hurling slurs on the Jerry Springazaki show, racism is ever-present (I would even go so far as to call it xenophobia).
They even have a label for it (and its connotation is rarely a positive one): gaijin. Means anyone who is not "truly Japanese". Even people who were born there and have one parent who is from say Korea or Thailand... they're gaijin, and will always be treated as such.
Whether you're white, black, Indian, or SE Asian, you are looked upon as an "outsider". When you feel it most is the case of trying to find work at a Japanese company, or a home in a non-gaijin neighborhood). You will quickly be made to feel that you "don't belong here" and they'll find an excuse to disqualify you. The message is clear: only true Japanese are welcome. They will treat you politely at all times, but they will never help you integrate into society, because they don't *want* you in their society.
Sure, there are plenty of westerners who live there but what you will notice is almost all of them with decent jobs, work for foreign companies. Also, almost all of them live in the gaijin part of town. There is a place called Roppongi that is teaming with successful Americans, Australians, Germans, French, South Americans -- whoever. And the reason they all live there is not because it's the best spot in Tokyo but because that's where the Japanese (some time ago) decided all the foreigners would live. So that's where the available housing is, available being a relative term of course.
This attitude is so pervasive that Japan is now facing a population crisis due to an unusually high proportion of senior citizens, and the fact that immigrating to Japan is near impossible unless you're willing to take extremely hazardous work, often without benefits. That, or be an English tutor. My point is not that Japan is evil or bad, but rather that if the good professor sees racism as a "western" thing, he's a pretty lousy researcher.
Racism of one sort or another can be found almost anywhere. I bet if you go to mainland China you can witness similar phenomenon as in Japan. Or to some rural farming area in India... or Nigeria, or wherever. This whole notion that westerners have a lock on close-minded thought is a load of crap. I suspect the professor himself is biased against all things western. Sure seems that way....
And yeah, that damn science, acting like it's sooooo superior.
Actually, there is large element of truth to this. Perhaps the best place to see it in in medical science.
The most recent time this has come up was in the medical ethics class I took here at NU this summer (the class was primarily populated by physicians at NW hospitals, meaning top-tier). One of the points we touched on was how pain management. The practice of Vipassana, observing sensation, teaches the individual to be equanimous to sensations. Instead of resisting the pain you look at it objectively without reacting. People that do this realize that pain is nothing more than an impulsive attempt to negatively judge and then ignore intense sensation. When the decision is made to stop reating with aversion to the sensation, it ceases to be pain.
And this is a very practical thing that all humans can do. In fact, the reason it came up was because this is exactly what Tyler Hamilton did to deal with the pain of his broken collarbone in the tour de france.
What is interesting is that this is such news to medical science, and wholy contrary to the traditional scientific thought, which is to drug the patient, period. But interest has certainly been on the rise. One of the people I know who is most interested in things like vipassana for pain treatment (among other areas of medicine) is my aunt, who is the director of university of chicago's new state-of-the-art (supposed to be no-holds barred, best in the world) children's hospital now being built. So interest in the upper levels of the medical community is gaining.
sorry this is so long, but the point is that until upper level medical professionals started actually doing it themselves and realizing the significance through personal experience, it was simply something that 'asian religions' did to 'pray,' which in itself is a fundamentally flawed christian interpretation. Because techniques of this kind are not products of physical scientific advancement, medical science has treated them as inferior.
If it's really effective, it can be studied scientifically.
I don't know anything about this technique, but research on pain has long recognized that it's not an objective experience. It also sounds like the gate control theory, a :gasp: scientific theory.
Actually, there is large element of truth to this. Perhaps the best place to see it in in medical science.
The most recent time this has come up was in the medical ethics class I took here at NU this summer (the class was primarily populated by physicians at NW hospitals, meaning top-tier). One of the points we touched on was how pain management. The practice of Vipassana, observing sensation, teaches the individual to be equanimous to sensations. Instead of resisting the pain you look at it objectively without reacting. People that do this realize that pain is nothing more than an impulsive attempt to negatively judge and then ignore intense sensation. When the decision is made to stop reating with aversion to the sensation, it ceases to be pain.
And this is a very practical thing that all humans can do. In fact, the reason it came up was because this is exactly what Tyler Hamilton did to deal with the pain of his broken collarbone in the tour de france.
What is interesting is that this is such news to medical science, and wholy contrary to the traditional scientific thought, which is to drug the patient, period. But interest has certainly been on the rise. One of the people I know who is most interested in things like vipassana for pain treatment (among other areas of medicine) is my aunt, who is the director of university of chicago's new state-of-the-art (supposed to be no-holds barred, best in the world) children's hospital now being built. So interest in the upper levels of the medical community is gaining.
sorry this is so long, but the point is that until upper level medical professionals started actually doing it themselves and realizing the significance through personal experience, it was simply something that 'asian religions' did to 'pray,' which in itself is a fundamentally flawed christian interpretation. Because techniques of this kind are not products of physical scientific advancement, medical science has treated them as inferior.
This vipassana thing is interesting : i have experimented on my self for struglling against dolor, but i ignore that it was existing, even if i suspected that Buddhist monks worked that way. Unlike reacting to it, i just watch it passing thought me : and it works.
Unfortunately, it doesnt work for all dolors. There is no chance to control in this way incredible dolor, or cancerous one. But it's interesting for minor dolor, like the ones in encounter while i practice local anesthesiae.
I will add that pain management is not also limited only to drugs , electrostimulations of the spine of certains aeras of the brain can give incredebely good results. This is the theory of the gate control.
Schematically there is two sensitive system, the system of touch, and the system of pain. The system of touch has the ability in the spine, and in the thalamus to lowered the influx of pain. That's why when we have stomach pain, it's good to touch the skin of this aera : we use the gate control.
Electrostimulation of certains aeras use this feature.
I don't know at what level work Vipassana work, but i am nearly sure, that he has a neurobiological support.
I've actually tried to use techniques like that when I start to get back spasms or some other accute pain that arises from athletics for example. Instead of trying to fight the pain, I simply try to realize the truth: there is no pain.
What did this prof suggest to RESOLVE the problem? Don't tell me he only write thousands of pages describing the problem and none giving any solutions.
This vipassana thing is interesting : i have experimented on my self for struglling against dolor, but i ignore that it was existing, even if i suspected that Buddhist monks worked that way. Unlike reacting to it, i just watch it passing thought me : and it works.
Unfortunately, it doesnt work for all dolors. There is no chance to control in this way incredible dolor, or cancerous one. But it's interesting for minor dolor, like the ones in encounter while i practice local anesthesiae.
I don't know at what level work Vipassana work, but i am nearly sure, that he has a neurobiological support.
One big thing to remember is that many parts of the third world don't have access to things like morphine. I know of many, many cases where people went through severe illness, even death, with nothing but vipassana. Severity doesn't matter, and that's even part of the point.
In fact, since the practice of it takes time and dedication, it really will only work for chronic or long-term issues, or for individuals already exposed to it, and this is actually where you will see it the most. Since learning to view sensation objectively requires a fundamental dismantling of impulsive mental responses to sensation, just trying at random will not work at a very deep level. Viewing sensation without judgement is like walking a tightrope, and requires the mind to be extremely concentrated.
As in the case of athletes, it is also important to push the body and not react impulsively to physical sensation, which is probably why it is easier for athletes to do it without prior experience.
On of the points of discussion in class was burn victims, and it has made me interested in tracking down some personal accounts of those who have experienced that unbearable pain for month upon month.
My understanding from class; full of NW oncologists, physicians, researchers, EMTs (even chopper!) and nurses; is that the primary method of dealing with pain is through drugs, but I'm not a physician and don't know the details. One section of the class was on whether it is ethical to continue giving pain medication to the point of death if requested by the patient, and how that differs from euthenasia and assisted suicide, so all discussion among this group indicated that the method of pain management primarily used in severe cases was drugs.
Quote:
i have experimented on my self for struglling against dolor, but i ignore that it was existing, even if i suspected that Buddhist monks worked that way. Unlike reacting to it, i just watch it passing thought me : and it works.
That's basically the beginning of it. When you learn it for real, you spend 3 1/2 days using your breath to focus your mind, and then a week straight focusing on sensation. 11 hours a day, and no communication of any kind, not even gestures.
wathing it pass through is exactly right, though.
Quote:
I will add that pain management is not also limited only to drugs , electrostimulations of the spine of certains aeras of the brain can give incredebely good results. This is the theory of the gate control.
Schematically there is two sensitive system, the system of touch, and the system of pain. The system of touch has the ability in the spine, and in the thalamus to lowered the influx of pain. That's why when we have stomach pain, it's good to touch the skin of this aera : we use the gate control.
Electrostimulation of certains aeras use this feature.
Since when is perfection the standard? People doing research are always imperfect and biased and have agendas.
Ah, how extremely, extremely true. Like the geneticists that claimed in the New England Journal of Medicine that alergies definitely have a genetic basis. It all hinged on an assumption of genetic determinism coupled with numbers that showed a slight to moderate correlation.
And it competely ignored the unquestionable psychological factor.
This actually might be another good example of how science is flawed: scientists in particular fields think that their field has the answers to everything.
You raise some interesting points Matsu - from my pov the 'problem' that
[snip]
I think ithis is an important issue though. For example my father hates all French people and (I suspect) various ethnic groupings - I know he doesn't believe in the racial superiority of any one race though. He just hates them for some indefinable reason.
WRT Africa and Christianity, the Dutch Reform Church called for segregated universities in the the 1920s, provided a theological argument for Apartheid in 1947, admitted that black people had souls in the 60s and finally admitted mixed congregations in 1987.
Not many black people go to Dutch Reform Church churches, funnily enough.
WRT Africa and Christianity, the Dutch Reform Church called for segregated universities in the the 1920s, provided a theological argument for Apartheid in 1947, admitted that black people had souls in the 60s and finally admitted mixed congregations in 1987.
Not many black people go to Dutch Reform Church churches, funnily enough.
That's one thing that has always made feel uncomfortable with "traditional " religions.
So many so called christian churches practice various forms of segregation...either black & white or rich & poor.
But the other faiths aren't any better..
The seperation of men & women in synagogues and in mosques is in my mind, disgusting and tradition bound nonsense..
Much "racial " predjudice is also sexism in disguise. Women are held to be inferior...or have inferior souls.. Buddhism teaches this as does Islam.
On top of this , Hindus perpetuate a "caste system " so your born into discrimination and relgiously based bigotry...
Thats why I can't stand so much of the pious hypocracy that comes from religionists across the world...They use religion as a form of ongoing sexism & racism...as approved by their version of doing " God's will "
Comments
Originally posted by segovius
The abuses against the Indigenous American population were not racist.
How so?
As for this day and age, maybe we are racist.
Originally posted by segovius
t.
The abuses against the Indigenous American population were not racist.
Nor where the exploits of Britain, France et al in the age of empires - they were Imperialist.
Let's free ourselves from this racist BS - a racist is someone who believes in the superiority of one person over another based on racial factors.
Racists are 'bad people' but not all 'bad people' are racists. Get a grip...
Much truth and a little ignorance nets a bad result.
I'm as much for a restricted use of the lable racist as you are, but even I recognize the "racism" built into some imperialist projects. There are fascinating studies in justifying the colonial/imperialist projects on the grounds of "racial" superiority. Race, there, is given not as skin color, but as a broader view of culture that grabs nationality and religion especially. Milton rejects a great many of them in the Reason of Church Government and mocks others of them in Paradise Lost, but there are so many documents, especially out of England, that when they approach religion and economy, most definitely seek to establish rights based of a basically "racial" outlook.
One would assume, thereafter, that by accepting the correct God, the members of this race could then effectively become of the same race as the European father. This is repeatedly denied and stunningly unsuccessful over the course of N.American history. Race then would have to go back to some component of skin color, and the broader definition, though used to advance politics, does not rescue the indian from genocide.
It may be, as you say, that race definitions ought to be limited, they have in the past been so limited, or expanded, but ussually to suit a different purpose.
The answer to the good professor that racism is somehow laced through every aspect of western culture, and that is why people dislike westerners, is a load of crap.
See also: Shetline is the man.
Finally: the most racist culture I've ever witnessed first-hand is decidedly eastern. Think Japan. While you won't see any burning crosses or rednecks hurling slurs on the Jerry Springazaki show, racism is ever-present (I would even go so far as to call it xenophobia).
They even have a label for it (and its connotation is rarely a positive one): gaijin. Means anyone who is not "truly Japanese". Even people who were born there and have one parent who is from say Korea or Thailand... they're gaijin, and will always be treated as such.
Whether you're white, black, Indian, or SE Asian, you are looked upon as an "outsider". When you feel it most is the case of trying to find work at a Japanese company, or a home in a non-gaijin neighborhood). You will quickly be made to feel that you "don't belong here" and they'll find an excuse to disqualify you. The message is clear: only true Japanese are welcome. They will treat you politely at all times, but they will never help you integrate into society, because they don't *want* you in their society.
Sure, there are plenty of westerners who live there but what you will notice is almost all of them with decent jobs, work for foreign companies. Also, almost all of them live in the gaijin part of town. There is a place called Roppongi that is teaming with successful Americans, Australians, Germans, French, South Americans -- whoever. And the reason they all live there is not because it's the best spot in Tokyo but because that's where the Japanese (some time ago) decided all the foreigners would live. So that's where the available housing is, available being a relative term of course.
This attitude is so pervasive that Japan is now facing a population crisis due to an unusually high proportion of senior citizens, and the fact that immigrating to Japan is near impossible unless you're willing to take extremely hazardous work, often without benefits. That, or be an English tutor. My point is not that Japan is evil or bad, but rather that if the good professor sees racism as a "western" thing, he's a pretty lousy researcher.
Racism of one sort or another can be found almost anywhere. I bet if you go to mainland China you can witness similar phenomenon as in Japan. Or to some rural farming area in India... or Nigeria, or wherever. This whole notion that westerners have a lock on close-minded thought is a load of crap. I suspect the professor himself is biased against all things western. Sure seems that way....
Originally posted by BRussell
And yeah, that damn science, acting like it's sooooo superior.
Actually, there is large element of truth to this. Perhaps the best place to see it in in medical science.
The most recent time this has come up was in the medical ethics class I took here at NU this summer (the class was primarily populated by physicians at NW hospitals, meaning top-tier). One of the points we touched on was how pain management. The practice of Vipassana, observing sensation, teaches the individual to be equanimous to sensations. Instead of resisting the pain you look at it objectively without reacting. People that do this realize that pain is nothing more than an impulsive attempt to negatively judge and then ignore intense sensation. When the decision is made to stop reating with aversion to the sensation, it ceases to be pain.
And this is a very practical thing that all humans can do. In fact, the reason it came up was because this is exactly what Tyler Hamilton did to deal with the pain of his broken collarbone in the tour de france.
What is interesting is that this is such news to medical science, and wholy contrary to the traditional scientific thought, which is to drug the patient, period. But interest has certainly been on the rise. One of the people I know who is most interested in things like vipassana for pain treatment (among other areas of medicine) is my aunt, who is the director of university of chicago's new state-of-the-art (supposed to be no-holds barred, best in the world) children's hospital now being built. So interest in the upper levels of the medical community is gaining.
sorry this is so long, but the point is that until upper level medical professionals started actually doing it themselves and realizing the significance through personal experience, it was simply something that 'asian religions' did to 'pray,' which in itself is a fundamentally flawed christian interpretation. Because techniques of this kind are not products of physical scientific advancement, medical science has treated them as inferior.
If it's really effective, it can be studied scientifically.
I don't know anything about this technique, but research on pain has long recognized that it's not an objective experience. It also sounds like the gate control theory, a :gasp: scientific theory.
Originally posted by giant
Actually, there is large element of truth to this. Perhaps the best place to see it in in medical science.
The most recent time this has come up was in the medical ethics class I took here at NU this summer (the class was primarily populated by physicians at NW hospitals, meaning top-tier). One of the points we touched on was how pain management. The practice of Vipassana, observing sensation, teaches the individual to be equanimous to sensations. Instead of resisting the pain you look at it objectively without reacting. People that do this realize that pain is nothing more than an impulsive attempt to negatively judge and then ignore intense sensation. When the decision is made to stop reating with aversion to the sensation, it ceases to be pain.
And this is a very practical thing that all humans can do. In fact, the reason it came up was because this is exactly what Tyler Hamilton did to deal with the pain of his broken collarbone in the tour de france.
What is interesting is that this is such news to medical science, and wholy contrary to the traditional scientific thought, which is to drug the patient, period. But interest has certainly been on the rise. One of the people I know who is most interested in things like vipassana for pain treatment (among other areas of medicine) is my aunt, who is the director of university of chicago's new state-of-the-art (supposed to be no-holds barred, best in the world) children's hospital now being built. So interest in the upper levels of the medical community is gaining.
sorry this is so long, but the point is that until upper level medical professionals started actually doing it themselves and realizing the significance through personal experience, it was simply something that 'asian religions' did to 'pray,' which in itself is a fundamentally flawed christian interpretation. Because techniques of this kind are not products of physical scientific advancement, medical science has treated them as inferior.
This vipassana thing is interesting : i have experimented on my self for struglling against dolor, but i ignore that it was existing, even if i suspected that Buddhist monks worked that way. Unlike reacting to it, i just watch it passing thought me : and it works.
Unfortunately, it doesnt work for all dolors. There is no chance to control in this way incredible dolor, or cancerous one. But it's interesting for minor dolor, like the ones in encounter while i practice local anesthesiae.
I will add that pain management is not also limited only to drugs , electrostimulations of the spine of certains aeras of the brain can give incredebely good results. This is the theory of the gate control.
Schematically there is two sensitive system, the system of touch, and the system of pain. The system of touch has the ability in the spine, and in the thalamus to lowered the influx of pain. That's why when we have stomach pain, it's good to touch the skin of this aera : we use the gate control.
Electrostimulation of certains aeras use this feature.
I don't know at what level work Vipassana work, but i am nearly sure, that he has a neurobiological support.
Originally posted by segovius
IF the scientists doing the study are being true scientists (ie objective observers) - big 'if'.
Since when is perfection the standard? People doing research are always imperfect and biased and have agendas.
Originally posted by Powerdoc
This vipassana thing is interesting : i have experimented on my self for struglling against dolor, but i ignore that it was existing, even if i suspected that Buddhist monks worked that way. Unlike reacting to it, i just watch it passing thought me : and it works.
Unfortunately, it doesnt work for all dolors. There is no chance to control in this way incredible dolor, or cancerous one. But it's interesting for minor dolor, like the ones in encounter while i practice local anesthesiae.
I don't know at what level work Vipassana work, but i am nearly sure, that he has a neurobiological support.
One big thing to remember is that many parts of the third world don't have access to things like morphine. I know of many, many cases where people went through severe illness, even death, with nothing but vipassana. Severity doesn't matter, and that's even part of the point.
In fact, since the practice of it takes time and dedication, it really will only work for chronic or long-term issues, or for individuals already exposed to it, and this is actually where you will see it the most. Since learning to view sensation objectively requires a fundamental dismantling of impulsive mental responses to sensation, just trying at random will not work at a very deep level. Viewing sensation without judgement is like walking a tightrope, and requires the mind to be extremely concentrated.
As in the case of athletes, it is also important to push the body and not react impulsively to physical sensation, which is probably why it is easier for athletes to do it without prior experience.
On of the points of discussion in class was burn victims, and it has made me interested in tracking down some personal accounts of those who have experienced that unbearable pain for month upon month.
My understanding from class; full of NW oncologists, physicians, researchers, EMTs (even chopper!) and nurses; is that the primary method of dealing with pain is through drugs, but I'm not a physician and don't know the details. One section of the class was on whether it is ethical to continue giving pain medication to the point of death if requested by the patient, and how that differs from euthenasia and assisted suicide, so all discussion among this group indicated that the method of pain management primarily used in severe cases was drugs.
i have experimented on my self for struglling against dolor, but i ignore that it was existing, even if i suspected that Buddhist monks worked that way. Unlike reacting to it, i just watch it passing thought me : and it works.
That's basically the beginning of it. When you learn it for real, you spend 3 1/2 days using your breath to focus your mind, and then a week straight focusing on sensation. 11 hours a day, and no communication of any kind, not even gestures.
wathing it pass through is exactly right, though.
I will add that pain management is not also limited only to drugs , electrostimulations of the spine of certains aeras of the brain can give incredebely good results. This is the theory of the gate control.
Schematically there is two sensitive system, the system of touch, and the system of pain. The system of touch has the ability in the spine, and in the thalamus to lowered the influx of pain. That's why when we have stomach pain, it's good to touch the skin of this aera : we use the gate control.
Electrostimulation of certains aeras use this feature.
That's really interesting.
Originally posted by BRussell
Since when is perfection the standard? People doing research are always imperfect and biased and have agendas.
Ah, how extremely, extremely true. Like the geneticists that claimed in the New England Journal of Medicine that alergies definitely have a genetic basis. It all hinged on an assumption of genetic determinism coupled with numbers that showed a slight to moderate correlation.
And it competely ignored the unquestionable psychological factor.
This actually might be another good example of how science is flawed: scientists in particular fields think that their field has the answers to everything.
Originally posted by shetline
If someone sticks a spoon in your eye, just remember: there is no spoon.
well, that would be ignorance (in the 'ignore' sense) which is the extreme opposite.
Originally posted by shetline
If someone sticks a spoon in your eye, just remember: there is no spoon.
You shouldn't watch Matrix so much
Originally posted by segovius
You raise some interesting points Matsu - from my pov the 'problem' that
[snip]
I think ithis is an important issue though. For example my father hates all French people and (I suspect) various ethnic groupings - I know he doesn't believe in the racial superiority of any one race though. He just hates them for some indefinable reason.
WRT Africa and Christianity, the Dutch Reform Church called for segregated universities in the the 1920s, provided a theological argument for Apartheid in 1947, admitted that black people had souls in the 60s and finally admitted mixed congregations in 1987.
Not many black people go to Dutch Reform Church churches, funnily enough.
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
WRT Africa and Christianity, the Dutch Reform Church called for segregated universities in the the 1920s, provided a theological argument for Apartheid in 1947, admitted that black people had souls in the 60s and finally admitted mixed congregations in 1987.
Not many black people go to Dutch Reform Church churches, funnily enough.
That's one thing that has always made feel uncomfortable with "traditional " religions.
So many so called christian churches practice various forms of segregation...either black & white or rich & poor.
But the other faiths aren't any better..
The seperation of men & women in synagogues and in mosques is in my mind, disgusting and tradition bound nonsense..
Much "racial " predjudice is also sexism in disguise. Women are held to be inferior...or have inferior souls.. Buddhism teaches this as does Islam.
On top of this , Hindus perpetuate a "caste system " so your born into discrimination and relgiously based bigotry...
Thats why I can't stand so much of the pious hypocracy that comes from religionists across the world...They use religion as a form of ongoing sexism & racism...as approved by their version of doing " God's will "