I recently interviewed Mike Huemer on his new Progressive Myths. To repeat, I consider it “the best book on wokeness.” You know you’re reading a special book by page 3, when Huemer states:
I will not give a neutral presentation in the following chapters, but I do aim to give an objective presentation. I am a philosopher, not a lawyer or a campaign manager. My task is not to replace left-wing propaganda with right-wing propaganda. My task is to replace propaganda with a fair and accurate account. Hence, though the myths herein are chosen for being incorrect in some way, I will mention when I think there is something in the vicinity of the myth that is correct…
Here’s the full interview, along with an outline of my main questions. Notice: In an apparent effort to underscore the self-righteous midwittery of wokeness, Youtube added an insipid content warning on climate change, apparently because Huemer and I critically discuss the topic).
Interview Outline
1. “Neutral” versus “objective” presentations. Quote and elaboration.
2. “Most philosophers stop being philosophers when they discuss current events.” Do you agree? What did you do differently in Part 1, and how can other philosophers emulate you?
3. Can you give us a philosophical summary of the Rittenhouse case?
4. A deliberately uninformed question: I heard Rittenhouse was friends with Nazis, or maybe a Nazi himself. The truth of the matter?
5. What are the basic facts on police shootings? What are the adjustments you have to make to see if police shootings are “racist”?
6. Did you know these facts when you wrote Justice Before the Law? Does anything you learned about true crime facts for PM make you see actually-existing police in a different light?
7. What do we really know about the prevalence of rape, sexual assault, and false accusations thereof?
8. What is a woman? Huemer’s take on my take.
7. Your section on “Racial Myths” doesn’t have a section on racial pay gaps. Call me greedy, but why not?! As a philosopher, what should we know when we approach this issue?
8. When they learned you had chapters on climate change, some people rushed to call you a “climate denier.” What is a fair summary of your position? Also: Have you read Fossil Future? Aside on “books that settle questions.”
9. The weird rise of wokism.
10. What controversial woke claims are actually true? (Veganism?)
11. My missing myths:
(a) Discrimination is the main cause of racial pay gaps.” Like the gender pay gap, there is actually overwhelming evidence for the common-sense view that racial pay gaps stem largely from differences in worker productivity rather than unfairness.
(b) “There’s no such thing as intelligence, and even if there is, IQ tests are a bad way to measure intelligence.” Some people really are smarter than others, and IQ scores are the greatest triumph of psychometrics.
(c) “Race is a social construct.” If this is true, why do socially identified race and DNA-identified race match so closely?
12. My readers’ missing myths:
“Public educational results would improve if only we spent more money on education.”
“America has been steadily gutting funding for social services since the 80s.”
“Increased government spending on health care leads to significantly better health outcomes.”
“The Native Americans were peaceful and living in harmony with nature.”
“Ancient matriarchal societies existed.”
13. In the friendliest possible spirit, how can other anti-woke thinkers improve their work?
14. What’s the second-best anti-woke book?
15. “Woke has peaked.” Review the ambiguity of the statement, then ask for his nuanced forecast.
I'm mostly amazed that Huemer can exist at the University of Colorado in Boulder.
Wow! (Looking at "my readers’ missing myths"). Thank you Bryan. Looking forward to listening to this.