Looking at Gad Saad’s Book (2020) “The Parasitic Mind” (Part 5 of 17)

0027 Chapter Five is titled, “Campus Lunacy: The Rise of the Social Justice Warrior”.

I continue with gender as the exemplar concern.  In the perspective-level of the previous diagram, being oppressed2c is a feminine trait2c.  On the situation level, the normal context of social construction3b brings the actuality of gender as a personal choice2b into relation with the potential of human will1b.  The human will1b is so relevant, that it makes biological distinctions1a irrelevant.

Once biological distinctions1a are irrelevant, then all orthodox views3a of men and women2a no longer matter.  Orthodox views3a concerning the biological distinctions1a between men and women2a have been around a long time.  The first great epic of the Greek language, The Iliad, revolves around that distinction.  Paris kidnaps Helen and brings her to Troy and triggers the Trojan War.  The unique masterpiece of the Jewish and Christian tradition starts in the Garden of Eden with the distinction between man and woman.

0028 Social construction replaces any need for the so-called “Western canon”.

Indeed, social construction offers an alternate content level, allowing me to depict the following speculative diagram, based on the title of chapter five.

Figure 10

0029 Yes, once feminism triumps, the situation level shifts to the content level.  A new “humanities”2a must be constructed3a in order to aesthetically represent the potential of the relevance of the human will1a (over biological distinctions1a) and to politically portray gender as a personal choice2a.

There goes the Iliad and the Bible.  Fare thee well, Western civilization.

0030 Of course, the alternative literature of the nouvelle academics must be situated by the patriarchy1b, as the potential from which arises the unspeakable horrors of well… those throwbacks who still are talking about the biological differences between men and women.

Call them “scientists”.  Call them “humanists”.  Call them “religious”.  They are overruled by the critique of dark illumination3b.  Ssocial construction3a, not orthodox views3a, should define the content level.

0031 Remember the so-called College of Arts and Sciences?

Let us now advocate for a new coalition of social inquiries.

May we call it the College of Social Constuction?

0032 Take a closer look at the above figure.

Several postmodern themes intertwine.

0033 On the content level, radical individualism predominates.  For other brands of social construction, replace “gender” with “the issue du jour”.

0034 On the situation level, Marxism stands out.  The “patriarchy” is the “system”.  The “system” is a term that substitutes for “capitalism”, along with its attendant division between the “bourgeois” and the “proletariat”.  The “system” injects a fantastic fluidity into the Marxist tradition.  A phantasmic dyad2b of dark illumination3b always manifests as oppressor and oppressed.  Another term for dark illumination3b is “critical theory”3b.

0035 On the perspective level, American big government (il)liberalism blossoms.  Who provides the protection1c and the privileged status for the oppressed2c?  It is the federal government.  Another term for protection1c is “safe space”.  Another term for light illumination3c is “social justice”3c.  The lawyer who sues for the causes of the ones privileged to be called, “oppressed”, is a “social-justice warrior”.