Loading...
Title : Epistemic Trespassing: From Ruby Payne to the “Science of Reading” – radical eyes for equity
link : Epistemic Trespassing: From Ruby Payne to the “Science of Reading” – radical eyes for equity
Epistemic Trespassing: From Ruby Payne to the “Science of Reading” – radical eyes for equity
Epistemic Trespassing: From Ruby Payne to the “Science of Reading” – radical eyes for equityEpistemic Trespassing: From Ruby Payne to the “Science of Reading”
In the midst of the Covid-19 pandemic, President Donald Trump has continued his disturbing trademark of self-assurance and bravado in the absence of expertise:
The president – who repeatedly downplayed the threat early in the global outbreak – has this week been hyping an anti-malarial drug, chloroquine, as a possible therapeutic treatment.“It may work, it may not work,” he said on Friday. “I feel good about it. It’s just a feeling. I’m a smart guy … We have nothing to lose. You know the expression, ‘What the hell do you have to lose?’”
As has become a common pattern now, these rash and dangerous claims were tempered by an actual expert in medicine:
Yet Trump’s “feeling”, on which he so often relies, was confronted by science when Dr Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, cautioned that evidence of chloroquine’s benefits against coronavirus is “anecdotal” and it should not be viewed as a miracle cure.
Trump is a cartoonish embodiment of epistemic trespassing, as defined by Nathan Ballantyne:
Epistemic trespassers are thinkers who have competence or expertise to make good judgments in one field, but move to another field where they lack competence—and pass judgment nevertheless. We should doubt that trespassers are reliable judges in fields where they are outsiders.
As the example of Trump above demonstrates—and as Ballantyne notes about Richard Dawkins and Neil deGrasse Tyson—it is quite common for people to trespass into areas of knowledge and expertise outside their own discipline or experiences.
Here, I want to investigate epistemic trespassing first in the Ruby Payne phenomenon, and then to better understand the current “science of reading” version of the Reading War.
Let’s consider epistemic trespassing more fully next.
Epistemic Trespassing: “exemplary critical thinking in one field does not generalize to others”
I don’t want to overwhelm this discussion with too fine an analysis from philosophical and linguistic fields; notably, I am sharing here outside my narrow area of expertise, education, while staying inside a part of my disciplinary expertise (linguistics) and seeking to avoid the very mistakes I am naming here.
This section draws on work by Ballantyne (linked above) and Bristol and Rossano, both of which are detailed and discipline-specific scholarship.
The examples below—Ruby Payne’s popularity as a self-proclaimed expert in CONTINUE READING: Epistemic Trespassing: From Ruby Payne to the “Science of Reading” – radical eyes for equity
thus Article Epistemic Trespassing: From Ruby Payne to the “Science of Reading” – radical eyes for equity
that is all articles Epistemic Trespassing: From Ruby Payne to the “Science of Reading” – radical eyes for equity This time, hopefully can provide benefits to all of you. Okay, see you in another article posting.
You now read the article Epistemic Trespassing: From Ruby Payne to the “Science of Reading” – radical eyes for equity with the link address https://onechildsmart.blogspot.com/2020/03/epistemic-trespassing-from-ruby-payne.html
0 Response to "Epistemic Trespassing: From Ruby Payne to the “Science of Reading” – radical eyes for equity"
Post a Comment