Academia might be catching that the concept of “microaggressions” are beyond ridiculous. Emory University psychology Professor Scott Lilienfeld is refuting the universally accepted concept of the “microaggressions” due to a “lack of scientific evidence.”
Dr. Lilienfield published in his recent paper “Microaggressions: Strong Claims, Inadequate Evidence” that microaggressions should not be included in workplace or campus diversity training because of the lack of scientific evidence to back them up. Lilienfield also argues that the term microaggression is incorrect because it implies that harm is intended — which isn’t the case.
He states in his article:
“The scientific status of the microaggression research program is far too preliminary to warrant its dissemination to real-world contexts.”
According to The College Fix:
Lilienfeld told The College Fix in a phone interview that he became interested in studying the microaggression phenomenon after noticing its ubiquitous discussion on college campuses, faculty meetings, and the corporate world.
“I began reading the literature, and became more curious and more concerned when I realized that there was hardly any evidence supporting the concept of microaggressions,” Lilienfeld said.
“Because they are totally in the eye of the beholder — anything you say could be labeled as a microaggression,” Lilienfeld said. “In the current literature, if someone is offended by something, it is a microaggression. You simply cannot progress scientifically in this way or expect to resolve racial tensions on a college campus.”
“Minority individuals may become hyper vigilant to recognize any signs of danger from speech or action. Conversely, majority members may begin to feel defensive because they have to watch every single thing they say.”
Lilienfield cites the major flaw with the concept of “microaggressions” as the attack is determined entirely by the reaction of the “victim” not by the action of the “aggressor”. By that logic, anything any of us ever do could be received as a “microaggression”.
Lilienfield also believes that the excessive amount of “anti-microaggression” training could in fact exacerbate racial and other minority conflict.
“Both sides need to talk to each other more not less. By handing out a list of phrases that you should not say because they are microaggressions stigmatizes speech and shuts down dialogue rather than encourages it.”
What do you think about this scholarly article regarding “microaggressions”? Let us know in the comments below!
(H/T The College Fix)