The Instigator
aaron101
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
alexmiller887
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Narritives of suffering and racism should not be talked about in academic communities

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/24/2014 Category: Education
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 416 times Debate No: 53274
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

aaron101

Pro

Narratives of suffering introduced into academia are bad. This is the position that I will take. Round 1 both teams will introduce sides. After that the argumentation begins.
alexmiller887

Con

So, I will be arguing that it is necessary to talk about suffering, for it is the only way to fix them.

Thank you in advance.
Debate Round No. 1
aaron101

Pro

Your welcome. My argument is that in the University dealing with social sciences; academics study narratives of suffering to determine the underlying assumptions behind those theories and stories of suffering through profound research. The problem placed here is that in the university research is a profound element in the academic community used to investigate social narratives of the disenfranchised.
My argument here is that, "research" is useful, but only in the sense of not being orientated to suffering. A study was done by Johns Hopkins in which young researches doing anthropology was invited at my school to study us and the human behavior that we had for their anthropology class. I was invited to sit down and talk about my urban life. The subaltern can speak, but is only invited to speak his or her pain for the perpetuation of the academic institution in terms of critical race, class, and, gender studies. When speaking about pain, it places you as the object to commodification and subject to research and profound investigation. The act of being studied upon places other academics to gaze upon you and study you. That act places you again in the place of alleniation and disenfranchisement, regardless of whether it feels that way. All this is made possible by talking about suffering, especially inside educational institutions and risk the bad things that I have outlined above. Con may try to disprove the claims about academic intellectuals being ones who commodify experiences, but still speaking about it that way, risks the things I have outlined above. I have a specific example of this, that talks about how Black females constantly in college university defended the position of the Black woman and instead of producing change and a useful form of scholarship and changing things, a whole bunch of White heterosexual males gathered together and decided that they want to analyze the depiction of the Black female and Black mothers and the popular question in the academic population, was what would I do if I was a Black mother. Not only did this put the Black mother as the depiction of the object, but also had the academy steal the narratives of Black females by pretending that they were the Black mother. The university and academics stole those narratives

My last point is that, an image of suffering creates a narrative of ontology that when a marginalized child views themselves in the context of the law, that she is forever damned because of these negative viewpoints of suffering and victimization that they identify with, that means that there is no hope and no possibility to survive. An article from "Marriot" claims that when we always have these negative view points of death and Black suffering that we destroy the political imagination of little children and other people creating a future with no hope. "Marriot" gives an example of Cameron and Cameron"s son; that Cameron has told these narratives of lynching to his son, and his son begins to fear the lynching itself; even though it hasn"t happened to him. Therefore, that viewpoint encrypts onto his actual political imagination and doesn"t actually allow him to see a world where he can survive and actually make change. His imagination has been killed and the only thing they can remember is the trauma of those narratives that has been narrated and told in the house as well as inside institutions. In short my argument is that presentation of narratives of suffering is disheartening and leas to cmmodification

inside the future and therefore enable them to imagine themselves in the future. This is the nature of the Alternative and the "Tuck and Yang evidence is the explanation of how, which I will get onto later."
alexmiller887

Con

Thank you to Pro for an excellent argument. I'll just summarise it for him.In a nutshell- correct me if I'm wrong, but he's saying that being studied as an object of suffering can disenfranchise you, expose you to alienation etc. etc.I will submit to that point- HOWEVER this does not meet the BoP, which is that Narritives [sic] of suffering and racism should not be talked about in academic communities. This means that they are bad, no matter what.

Over to you, Pro.

(arguments next round, I need some time)
Debate Round No. 2
aaron101

Pro

No, thank you CON. You are exactly right in my point. I apologize for the long explanation. I wanted to use academic scholarships to prove my thesis and point without just stating claims. That was a really good summary that CON gave in the last round, in which I guess you can cross apply to this round as it would be my explanation. The argument that Con made was precise, but there was one particular point that was made that I disagree with. CON said that "the analysis that I have provided doesn't meet the BOP and that it is tailored towards claiming that suffering is bad no matter what." That is not necessarily true. I may agree with that category for the second half of my argument dealing with scenes of subjection and narratives being passed down to marginalized children (which I will rehash and explain in the summary portion tailored towards round 5) creating a political analysis of despair, but I disagree with the claim for the first part of my argument. The first, part of my argument is tailored specifically to the university, which is an academic community as talked about in the topic. Research as stated in my claim above is specifically tailored to the university and is an academic activity. (People may disagree with me, but an alternative interpretation wasn't talked about in this round so prefer mine) Therefore, the act of research is specifically tailored towards academic communities and when we present narratives of suffering for social sciences and anthropologist to view then "it places you as the object to commodification and subject to research and profound investigation. I was invited to sit down and talk about my urban life. The subaltern can speak, but is only invited to speak his or her pain for the perpetuation of the academic institution in terms of critical race, class, and, gender studies." Social sciences and Anthropology as well as other studies uses research to subjectify and in doing that takes the other's voice. You can extend my main points from above. Thank you CON, back to you! :)
alexmiller887

Con

I have so many debates going on right now, I'm afraid I'll have to FF this one. Apologies to Pro- it was fun while it lasted.
Very sorry.
Debate Round No. 3
aaron101

Pro

Of course. No apologies needed. Thank you very much.
alexmiller887

Con

Au revoir.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.