Scan barcode
A review by typish
Cynical Theories: How Activist Scholarship Made Everything about Race, Gender, and Identity — And Why This Harms Everybody by Helen Pluckrose, James Lindsay
3.0
On the good side, I have formed a more systematic point of view on Theory by reading the book, which helped in framing the whole story.
On the improvable side, I would have preferred more actual data on prevalence on these views in academia (and activism) and on how nuanced they get (the takeaway from reading the chapters seems to be "90% academics in these disciplines are extreme Theorists"", which seems improbable).
I'm also not sure many of the quotations cited in the book are as damning as they are thought to be (with the notable exception of the later chapters, especially from the "educators").
It also feels like the celebration of liberalism (which I agree with) is too handwavy, especially coming from someone who is complaining about the theoretical incoherence of Theory: flaws are recognized, yes, but the topic is far from explored with a remotely comparable depth.
Finally, I would have greatly appreciated a more critical discussion of Foucault and Deridda in the initial chapters: ideas, yes, but also what was good, what was bad, and why.
On the improvable side, I would have preferred more actual data on prevalence on these views in academia (and activism) and on how nuanced they get (the takeaway from reading the chapters seems to be "90% academics in these disciplines are extreme Theorists"", which seems improbable).
I'm also not sure many of the quotations cited in the book are as damning as they are thought to be (with the notable exception of the later chapters, especially from the "educators").
It also feels like the celebration of liberalism (which I agree with) is too handwavy, especially coming from someone who is complaining about the theoretical incoherence of Theory: flaws are recognized, yes, but the topic is far from explored with a remotely comparable depth.
Finally, I would have greatly appreciated a more critical discussion of Foucault and Deridda in the initial chapters: ideas, yes, but also what was good, what was bad, and why.