Unfortunately because almost any and every thing that has ever been written or said about quite literally everything is now freely available on the internet it is almost impossible (indeed is impossible) for anyone to say or write anything new about most almost everything. Everything is a modification of or a riff upon something that has already been said. We are not only standing on the shoulders of the so called greats but on the shoulders of the entire philosophical corpus of humankind altogether.
And of course the so called conservative on the right-side of the culture wars that deliberately and strategically took her (and others down, including others to be so targeted) are pathological liars and/or strategic ideological bomb-throwers. Anything remotely related to the truth is thus distorted and/or discounted. So any kind of context (or multiple contexts) other than the binary exclusions aggressively promoted by the likes of Rufo et al becomes the only seemingly "acceptable" perspective.
I have taken the "venal sin" approach merely because I think the plagiarism is a bit of a red herring. The bigger problem, is the DEI model of education, and I do not want to be sidetracked by the plagiarism component. DEI transforms even brilliant scholars, which Gay is not, into tokens. And that is a mortal sin.
That’s a helpful perspective. Thanks.
Unfortunately because almost any and every thing that has ever been written or said about quite literally everything is now freely available on the internet it is almost impossible (indeed is impossible) for anyone to say or write anything new about most almost everything. Everything is a modification of or a riff upon something that has already been said. We are not only standing on the shoulders of the so called greats but on the shoulders of the entire philosophical corpus of humankind altogether.
And of course the so called conservative on the right-side of the culture wars that deliberately and strategically took her (and others down, including others to be so targeted) are pathological liars and/or strategic ideological bomb-throwers. Anything remotely related to the truth is thus distorted and/or discounted. So any kind of context (or multiple contexts) other than the binary exclusions aggressively promoted by the likes of Rufo et al becomes the only seemingly "acceptable" perspective.
The benighted Rufo specializes in this tactic.
I have taken the "venal sin" approach merely because I think the plagiarism is a bit of a red herring. The bigger problem, is the DEI model of education, and I do not want to be sidetracked by the plagiarism component. DEI transforms even brilliant scholars, which Gay is not, into tokens. And that is a mortal sin.