Spencer’s Reply to Glasgow, Haslanger, and Jeffers

Joshua Glasgow, S. Haslanger, Chike Jeffers, Quayshawn Spencer
{"title":"Spencer’s Reply to Glasgow, Haslanger, and Jeffers","authors":"Joshua Glasgow, S. Haslanger, Chike Jeffers, Quayshawn Spencer","doi":"10.1093/OSO/9780190610173.003.0008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Quayshawn Spencer clarifies that his defense of biological racial realism in Chapter 3—which is called “OMB race theory”—is meant to be a part of a larger radically pluralist theory about the nature and reality of race in American English. Next, Spencer defends OMB race theory against the South Asian mismatch objection from Glasgow and Jeffers. Third, Spencer raises an empirical adequacy objection against Glasgow’s, Haslanger’s, and Jeffers’s race theories insofar as they are unable to predict how race and races are talked about in multiple national discussions, such as whether Rachel Dolezal is wrong to claim a Black racial identity and whether Harvard University has been unlawfully discriminating against Asian applicants in undergraduate admissions.","PeriodicalId":202144,"journal":{"name":"What Is Race?","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"What Is Race?","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/OSO/9780190610173.003.0008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Quayshawn Spencer clarifies that his defense of biological racial realism in Chapter 3—which is called “OMB race theory”—is meant to be a part of a larger radically pluralist theory about the nature and reality of race in American English. Next, Spencer defends OMB race theory against the South Asian mismatch objection from Glasgow and Jeffers. Third, Spencer raises an empirical adequacy objection against Glasgow’s, Haslanger’s, and Jeffers’s race theories insofar as they are unable to predict how race and races are talked about in multiple national discussions, such as whether Rachel Dolezal is wrong to claim a Black racial identity and whether Harvard University has been unlawfully discriminating against Asian applicants in undergraduate admissions.
斯宾塞对格拉斯哥、哈斯兰格和杰弗斯的答复
Quayshawn Spencer澄清说,他在第三章中对生物种族现实主义的辩护——被称为“OMB种族理论”——意在成为一个更大的关于美国英语种族本质和现实的激进多元主义理论的一部分。接下来,斯宾塞为OMB种族理论辩护,反对格拉斯哥和杰弗斯对南亚错配的反对。第三,斯宾塞对格拉斯哥、哈斯兰格和杰弗斯的种族理论提出了经验充分性的反对意见,因为他们无法预测种族和种族在多个国家的讨论中是如何被谈论的,比如雷切尔·多尔扎尔(Rachel Dolezal)声称自己是黑人种族身份是否错误,哈佛大学(Harvard University)在本科录取中是否非法歧视亚裔申请者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信