One of the most damaging effects of wokeism is to make it seem like other ways of knowing are as good as modern scientific knowledge. Some of the claims of indigenous cultures can be respected, but only if they are proven to be valid by conventional scientific testing.
New Zealand is in the midst of a campaign to teach the ways of knowing to the indigenous peoples of the country. The reason for this is to give Maori credibility not just as indigenous people with legal rights, but as pseudoscientific views.
I received an email from a biology colleague in New Zealand.
The Government in New Zealand is trying to add something to science courses. Matauranga means the knowledge system. The god of the forest is said to be the creator of humans and all plants and creatures of the forest. The goddess Papatuanuku sheds tears. They claim that they have always been scientists. Matauranga must be acknowledged as the equal of western science in order for the children to fail in science at school.
>
One way to rationalise is that they are the indigenous people of New Zealand and that their knowledge deserves respect. They wrote a letter to the Listener that said matauranga was not science and had no place in science courses. The kickback against this was astounding, with some 2000 academics signing a petition condemning them.
>
The Royal Society of New Zealand is likely to dismiss two academics involved in the case. They have been accused of being racist.
>
Wokism is under way here.
The colleague told me that the two forms of knowledge will not be taught only to Maori. There will be exam questions, but it is not clear if they will require students to parrot the tenets of Mtauranga.
Click on the picture to see the original letter. It is civil and conciliatory, but defends modern science. The signers are from New Zealand.
This is a sensible letter which is not inflammatory, except to those postmodernists and Wokeists who see other ways of knowing as valid as modern science. They are incorrect. 2,000 academics and public figures signed a heated objection.
We categorically disagree with their views. Mtauranga is not lesser to other knowledge systems. Mtauranga has always included methodologies that overlap with Western understandings of the scientific method.
>
Mtauranga is more than just an equivalent of Western science. It has ways of viewing the world that are different from other knowledge systems.
The factual assertions of the way of knowing are inferior to other knowledge systems. They are myths and have no factual basis, and to teach them on par with science is ludicrous.
The people who signed the letter are either ignorant of science or flaunting their virtue. Over the years, New Zealand has tried to correct the inequalities that have been caused by colonials. One way to correct it is to pretend that the knowledge is true. It is a recipe for continuing scientificIgnorance if we teach that in the schools. It is the same as a letter saying that fundamentalists Christian "ways of knowing" should be taught in science class. For American courts, freedom of speech does not mean that teachers can teach anything they want in a class. As we see above, Maori "science" is a creationist.
Toby Young talks about the issue in an article in The Spectator.
An excerpt.
All hell broke loose when this letter was published. The views of the authors, who were all professors at the University of Auckland, were denounced by a number of organizations. She said the letter had caused a lot of hurt and dismay among our staff, students and alumni and pointed to major problems with some of our colleagues.
>
Two of Professor Cooper's academic colleagues have issued an open letter condemning the heretics for causinguntold harm and hurt. More than 2,000 academics agreed to add their names to the open letter that they were invited to. A panel was set up to investigate after five members of the Royal Society complained.
>
The witch-finders ignored several principles of natural justice. Two members of the panel had to be replaced because they were signatories of the open letter. Three of the five complaints were anonymous and when the society asked them to identify themselves, they fell by the wayside. The investigation is continuing with two remaining and a new panel.
>
It is not too late to save the professor. The absurdity of punishing a scientist for engaging in a debate about the validity of science will be helped by letters from members of the Royal Society. You can send an email to Roger Ridley, the chief executive of the Royal Society of New Zealand. The only thing that will help the triumph of intellectual intolerance is for believers in free speech to not do anything.
I would urge readers who feel strongly about this to write toroger.ridley@royalsociety.org.
The official letter from the Vice Chancellor of the University of Auckland is here.
She said that she favors free speech, but.
I want to make it clear that the academics do not represent the views of the university.
>
mtauranga Mori is a distinctive and valuable knowledge system that the University has deep respect for. Western empirical science is not at odds with mtauranga Mori. They have a lot to learn from each other.
>
This view is part of our commitment to Te Tiriti and te ao principles and is at the heart of our new strategy and vision.
>
New Zealand has an opportunity to lead the world in this area. The University of Auckland is the country's largest research institution and should be at the forefront of this exploration.
The letter is from a woman who is afraid. Is modern science on par with the knowledge of the people of the land? I don't think this is their view, I know several academics there.
I will give a few excerpts from her letter as well.
There is only one excerpt from the letter in which Freshwater takes issue with the seven academics who signed the letter.
The freedom to express ideas is not constrained by their perceived capacity to elicit discomfort or by presuppositions concerning their veracity. Allowing the expression of an idea does not mean endorsement by the University. This is our position in the debate about science and mtauranga Mori.
>
The University was free to disagree with the views of our seven academics. It is not a sign that the University is censoring or trying to silence our academics, it is just making clear that such views are not representative of the plethora views within the institution. That is good in a university.
If that is healthy, the University of Auckland is very sick. Two of the signers may be kicked out of the Royal Society for not adhering to University principles. The official view of the city is to put mtauranga on par with modern science.
The World News reports that Freshwater apologized.
The letter did not represent the views of the university.
>
She wrote in an email on Monday that it had caused a lot of hurt.
I don't have a copy of that email, but a New Zealander could send me one.
The controversy that started last summer is from an article on the website.
The TEU, the union which represents academics such as the professors, released a statement saying they "neglected to engage with or mention the many highly accomplished scholars and scientists in Aotearoa who have sought to reconcile notions of science, mtauranga Mori, and Mori The Royal Society Te Aprangi disagrees with the narrow and outdated definition of science outlined in the letter. The New Zealand Association of Scientists was dismayed to see a number of prominent academics questioning the value of mtauranga to science. Paul Goldsmith supported the letter writers.
>
Daniel Hikuroa pointed out that Mtauranga Mori was clearly science. Tara said that they did not navigate to Aotearoa on myths and legends. We didn't live in balance with the environment without science. Mori were the first people to study in New Zealand. Tina Ngata wrote that the letter was a testament to how racism is fostered within New Zealand academia.
The New Zealand Psychological Society condemned the view of the "Satanic Seven". To read the whole PDF, click on the screenshot.
The President of the New Zealand Psychological Society wrote a few quotes from the letter, which was supposed to be from the entire society.
I think it is important that we express our disappointment in the recent letter by professors of psychology, biological sciences and critical studies. We wish to express our support and aroha for those who were negatively affected by the letter. The letter was not subject to the established protocols of peer review and so the contents reflect opinion. Racist comments and moral panic were used in the letter to justify the exclusion of Mori knowledge as a legitimate science.
There are diversionary claims! The letters to the non-science jounal aren't peer reviewed. Who said no? The letter was not racist. Wait! There is more!
. The letter writers are concerned that science is being misrepresented. They acknowledge that science has been used to aid colonisation, as have literature and art. This is similar to saying guns don't kill people. People kill other people. Professor Linda Tuhiwai Smith established that science has been used to colonise and commit genocide towards Mori and other Indigenous peoples. Science is in the hands of colonisers. The writers fail to note the overwhelming evidence that the users of the science they favour are also the ones who set the rules about what counts as science, where it can be taught, learned, published or funded. The issue is relevant to the need to decolonise the power base in our learning institutions.
>
. The White Saviour is where Mori are told which elements of their Indigenous knowledge are important. The writers speak for Mori and say thatIndigenous knowledge is critical to the preservation of culture and local practices. The writers place Mori knowledge to archival value, ceremony, management and policy, although it is not clear what is meant here. Speaking for Mori ignores obligations to honour the Treaty of Waitangi and ignores the overwhelming evidence that racism is a primary reason that Mtauranga Mori science is overvalued.
The last sentence is false. Mtauranga Mori science is mostly wrong. It is an instantaneous creation, and its advocates should say, "Mtauranga is often right but is also sometimes wrong." There is more.
Mori knowledge is critical to the preservation of our culture and practices because we are resisting and trying to develop. Mori say that the discovery of empirical, universal truths falls far short of what we can define as science itself. Mori don't want them to define science. We have done it ourselves despite the obstacles.
>
. It is concerning that two of the writers are professors of psychology, as psychology has a long history of marginalising Mori knowledge. The letter reinforces racist assumptions about the validity of Mtauranga Mori science. We are concerned about the wellbeing of Mori staff and students who must now deal with this letter.
It's unbelievable that this can come out of the mouths of academics. Science is in the hands of colonisers. Really? Science, architecture, and religion have all been used for bad purposes. This doesn't say anything about whether modern science is worth as much as the claims of the Maori. They have to keep their mouths shut because they will be demonized.
Good relations with the Maori have been a priority for the New Zealand government in the past few decades. Keeping good relations doesn't require you to accept a way of knowing that is wrong.
My friend said that Wokism is well under way here.
I need to write to Roger to make sure that two of the seven don't get kicked out of New Zealand's Royal Society. Society will have branded itself as a joke if they are.
