@byzantinepower short thread as promised on why the search for forgotten great ppl of colour, minorities, and great women in the past is, in fact, deeply backward idea sold as progressive.

Coming right here. It will take a couple of minutes.

So, of course, there has been many underappreciated people in the past due to unfavourable views on non Europeans, women, you name it. For instance it's hard to sort out to what extent Heloise contributed to to Abelard's philosophy, Mill's Harriet to his... then there are those

that were put aside like Mary Wollstonecraft etc. It is indeed ok to go back, see, and reexamine their thoughts. However, to push for the view that there are great number of women (and other) thinkers whose work was completely buried and disappeared that is waiting now to be

discovered is in fact to assume something very peculiar about human nature: and that is that we become who we are by birth. So, there are great philosophers by birth (geniuses) and the only thing that society does is gives them due respect or in the case of discriminated groups

denies it. This is deeply troubling, reactionary idea by the very standards of progressives. We become who we are, they argue, thanks to the society, culture, family we grow up in. I happen to agree with this. But, in that case if we are brought up as a woman in a society that

tells us we cannot think, or learn Latin, it will be very hard for us to break that chain. This will shape us, shape our own nature. (I am simplifying here). But basically who we are will be then the result of the chains we grew up in. If this is so, there is no way there are

thousands of thinkers among women and minorities that were hidden on purpose. To suppose that there are means to assume that we can all regardless of society and its views become geniuses. This is very 'unprogressively' thing to believe. (The best I could do now after a long day)