Intent and Critical Theory

 With palms together,

The Buddha Way teaches there are Three Poisons: Greed, Hatred, and Delusion and we address these with the Three Antidotes: Generosity, Love, and Wisdom.

Today I’d like to address an issue with one of the aspects of Critical Theory, derived from Postmodernism, and an underlying theoretical foundation of Critical Role Theory, as well as the Cancel Culture and Political Correctness movements. One of the core assumptions of the theory is this: “Language operates hierarchically through binaries, always placing one element above another...” and in discourse, “the speaker’s meaning has no more authority than the hearer’s interpretation and thus intention cannot outweigh impact.” In other words, the author’s “intentions are irrelevant” even when known. (Cynical Theories, Pluckrose, H and Lindsay, J., 2020 P.40).

Felt injuries of racism, sexism, ageism, and other prejudices often cause us to want to defend ourselves, counter attack, or otherwise be “made whole” through the courts. We may want to “cancel” the perpetrator of our felt injury, seek some form of restorative justice or some other compensation. Our subjective interpretation of the experience and its consequent pain and suffering may be tangible and visceral. . There is no question as to the painful effects of prejudice: economic. academic, psychological, etc.

The movements I refer to above are attempts to correct centuries of oppression. Members and advocates believe prejudice is structural to society and there is truth in this observation. That truth needs addressing, to be sure, yet, there are aspects to the way these movements attempt to address it that are, in my opinion, problematic. First, and perhaps foremost, are its broadly generalized assumptions. While racism and other prejudices, may be structural, it does not mean every person within a group of those identified as oppressive, are oppressive, racist or sexist. To claim the alternative is true is, itself prejudiced against individuals. Second, a vindictive approach to oppressors is hardly effective, it simply succeeds in making those identified more resistant and demands they entrench themselves even more deeply into their prejudicial state. Finally, such an approach is harmful to the oppressed as it disallows any real recovery from victimhood.

For Zen Buddhist and others, especially those in recovery, it is important to keep in mind (and heart), the power of forgiveness, Forgiveness of the effects of prejudicial acts against us requires a willingness to accept or understand the intent of the offender. Was the offense intended? Where was his or her mind? What was in his heart?

To suggest such questions are meaningless is to denigrate our humanity and place us in the same camp as the oppressor: prejudiced and wielding that prejudice with the power to harm. From a Buddhist point of view, karmic consequence follows intent, so intent is critical in understanding and we need understanding to more correctly address the situation. Buddha diagnosed and his treatment followed his diagnosis. To arrive at a functional and comprehensive diagnosis we must be comprehensive in our exploration and fact gathering. What good is a diagnosis that comes from missing data?

What Critical Theory and its Social Justice Warriors seem to refuse to do is look deeply with a willingness to examine intent, since intent is already assumed to be that of power and dominance. And if it weren’t? No matter, the effect of the words or actions is far more important, they say. The net effect of this is a never-ending conflict between binaries with little hope for conflict resolution, save to say the subjugation of the “other.”