Leaderboard

This may be a difference in perspective. Iain McGilchrist looks at it in terms of left-brain and right-brain perspectives: from the one, things can appear more binary when stripped of the context and nuance that comes from the other. This may be an inherent problem with top-down technocracies where certain narratives are treated as “fact”. The dichotomy between the theories of the “experts” and the real life experiences of the people being analogous to the left and right brain. This then creates division between those that have faith in that narrative as “fact” and those that see a different perspective or a broader picture. McGilchrist argues that a structural shortcoming of the left-brain is that is it is unable to perceive the nature of the right-brain.

No idea. I don’t claim to an innovater in the English language, I’m no Shakespeare, but I think the question should be posed to you. Why do you believe that the word woke so succinctly sums up the essence of your definition? Please explain because I am honestly at a loss here? If, as I suspect, theres no direct correlation and we’re just looking for a word to tag on to a theme then in answer to your request, I suggest decentrithorkusmogrificarbiturb, its just as absurd as using the past tense of wake IMO.

What other word can better be used to capture the shift of the left from class based politics to identity politics? (And the parallel shift of corporations, professions and the middle class to the left?).

Peckris’ argument does seem valid when considering that “reported” truths and facts cannot be relied upon as such these days, i.e, truths and facts. Has the reporter done sufficient research? Who did he interview, was his information derived from first hand accounts, Chinese whispers or, dare I suggest, re-interpreted for purposes of eliciting certain reactions to reinforce certain existing beliefs. Does he even care about truth and honesty? Probably not. However, to discount one source of information in favour of another believing the latter to be more trustworthy than the former when equally uncertain of the source of that information may be fallacious. As for the word woke, don’t get me started, it is the past tense of wake, nothing else. I refuse to use the word “woke” in its current context and to acknowledge it in conversation; there’re already too many sub-standard, useless, dumbed-down Americanisms in the English language as it stands, without entertaining new ones. It grieves me just to hear it used. Such language seems to be created by those who lack sufficient vocabulary to express themselves adequately in the first place and therefore resort to creating such rubbish out of ignorance. Some may argue that it is a progression and development of a language. I see it as a regression.

... and are you not also ignoring facts - as displayed in the Daily Mail - simply because of your bias against that paper? As @oldcopper puts it, much better than I could: "when you put the Daily Mail clipping to Peckris, he pulls out the cliched lazy get-out clause so beloved of the Left". Before you say "Why hasn't the BBC repeated the story?", that organisation has become so woke, left wing and anti Brexit it has ceased to publish any news that contradicts their viewpoint. I am wasting blood pressure again - I'm out of here.