Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

soulstudios t1_j044rkg wrote

Reply to comment by philosophybreak in Existence is infinitely richer than our descriptions of it. So, rather than cling to reductive explanations that only ‘close’ life’s possibilities, we should ‘open’ reality by seeing ourselves as perpetual students | Interview with Black Existentialist Lewis Gordon by philosophybreak

Then give it a different name. While black people (in america) are heavily disenfranchised, so are the Uyghurs in China, the tibetans in Tibet, Ethnic Muslims in many parts of the world, whites (currently) in south africa, the list goes on.

Ignoring the fact that from the viewpoint of most biologists 'race' as a concept doesn't exist, what he's tlaking about (according to your summary) has nothing intrinsically to do with african americans, more to do with dominant and sub-dominant subcultures.

−2

surviveditsomehow t1_j052fuh wrote

The existence of Black Existentialism does not preclude a broader all-encompassing viewpoint.

A direct examination of the concept from the perspective of one specific group is perfectly valid, and could even be a precursor to a broader theory.

And I’m sure that a closer examination of other disenfranchised groups would also reveal meaningfully distinct characteristics between those groups such that a single group cannot perfectly generalize to all groups, thus requiring a much broader effort to properly construct a general theory.

3

soulstudios t1_j0atxna wrote

It's not perfectly valid, because it's naming black people - not african-american people - but all black people, including those who are in dominant positions of power in their given societies.

If the viewpoint is really so-specific to the united states, then call it that. But I HIGHLY doubt that is the case.

−1