Transhumanism in the Social Imagination...

 

I identify as...

What you identify as is a hot topic today and will continue to be so. What do I identify as? I identify as a child of God, created in the image of God. In this fallen world, I am known as a human being. I was born female and that's the way I live... as a female. Now, some of you may or may not believe in God and that's your choice as a means and end to a destination, your destination.

Today, we are going to discuss transhumanism. What is that? Its not about gender, its not about going to Mars and becoming a Martian.  Its not a new age transcendentalism book or glowing crystal either. Its a social movement. One that I would deem reprobate in the social imagination.

    Transhumanism is a cultural and intellectual movement that believes we can and should, improve the human condition through the use of advanced technologies. One of the core concepts in transhumanist thinking is life extension: Through genetic engineering, nanotech, cloning and other emerging technologies, eternal life may soon be possible. Likewise, transhuimanists are interested in the ever-increasing number of technologies that can boost our physical, intellectual and psychological capabilities beyond what humans are naturally capable of ~ Anthony Sebstian, "What is Transhumanism, or, What does it mean to be Human?" in ExtremeTech April 1, 2013. 

You might be wondering who or what is the head of this movement? Its a growing international consortium of leading academics, law professors, biotethicists, and military advisors.  They have combined the use of :genetics, robotics, artificial intelligence and nanotechnology which they collectively deem - GRIN. Its nothing to grin about but they sure are grinning.Why? 

They, those grinning, have become deluded by pseudo-science and yet elated by it as they contemplate death vs. eternal life. What drives them, what motivates them? The fundamental anxiety... the fear of death of course. The fundamental anxiety as first posited by Alfred Schutz is what drives everyone... even those of the Freudian doctrine which says that sex drives man. Wrong. Its the fear of death that drives people to do what they do... and that includes all sexual activity.

Today, we are in the Hybrid Age, in which the  conflux (hybridization) of emerging technologies will give us the tools to radically alter the sociobiological construct of the human species. In the Hybrid Age, men will merge with machines to transcend the limitations of their body. Diseases will be cured by editing defective genes and superhuman abilities will become possible through engineering new ones ~ Timothy Alberino, Birthright: The Coming Posthuman Apocalypse and the Usurpation of Adam's Dominion on Planet Earth; pg. 270, 2020. 

The discussion should be... can we improve the human condition through the use of advanced technologies? Nietzschean philosophy is the bedrock of this concept of directed evolution in its 'will to power' ideology. The end goal is to become post-human. Transhumanism is the way... Mmm. I thought Jesus said He was the way, the truth and the life. This bizarre transhumanist theology is plainly antithetical to the gospel of Christ. They are not interested in retaining the image of god ~ T.A. pg. 273: 2020.

In the same book, 'Birthright', the author continues on page 275... the social castes of the future will consist of two groups: the Neo (new humans) and the Nea (neanderthalic). As you can well imagine, it is about the haves and the have nots. The haves are those that have gone along to get along, they have taken the red pill. The question is... at the end of the day will they even remember that they were humans? Those that are the have nots will know. You might think then that the original would( be the wiser (and they will be wiser) but that doesn't mean the winner in this future scenario. 

The haves will sense something in the have nots that is disturbing to them, alien to them. And, they will be moved to exterminate them out of fear that have nots actually have something that the haves don't. What is that fear? Its the same fear that we have today, the fear of death. But, this fear serves a purpose. Its purpose was/is to drive us to the Creator not toward recreating ourselves though that was a foreseeable outcome by the Creator. 

What will become of either the haves vs. the have nots? That's anyone's educated guess. As for mine... it will be a long battle. It will be a termination. All the have nots will be running from a terminator. It sounds so Hollywood and fatalistic but make no mistake we who are born again must believe and trust in that we having been marked by God will be overlooked but for a certain amount of time.  

…And out of the smoke, locusts descended on the earth, and they were given power like that of the scorpions of the earth. They were told not to harm the grass of the earth or any plant or tree, but only those who did not have the seal of God on their foreheads. The locusts were not given power to kill them, but only to torment them for five months, and their torment was like the stinging of a scorpion. In those days men will seek death and will not find it; they will long to die, but death will escape them... Revelation 9:3-6.

What will happen after that? Well, that is not just anyone's guess. Its been written and anyone who changes that information will not exist to retell it. *See Revelation 19, 20, 21 and 22

...I testify to everyone who hears the words of prophecy in this book: If anyone adds to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. And if anyone takes away from the words of this book of prophecy, God will take away his share in the tree of life and the holy city, which are described in this book. He who testifies to these things says, “Yes, I am coming soon.” Amen. Come, Lord Jesus! The grace of the Lord Jesus be with all the saints... Revelation 22:18-21.

 

History, the Mandela Effect and Time Travel in the Social Imagination...

What about history, the Mandela Effect and time travel in the Social Imagination? Is there some strange connection or disconnection? Well, history is based on what has been written down, recorded and agreed on, right? Yes and No. 

Yes, because the winner, or those that control the information, write the history. No, because... history is based on what people remember about an event, (eye witness accounts are subject to perception/position) get others to agree with them and then its written down as 'the' history. 

And, when the so called 'facts' are given whether by word of mouth, book, or speech... its still about what we remember and here is where the Mandela Effect interferes. And, yes... you can say that we can check the facts... but sometimes, the facts have been Mandela (ed). How? Because, its still a game of telephone. Pass the information along and hope it gets through the way it was given. 

Only math remains pretty much outside of such dispersal, pretty much outside of man's inherent disposition for error. Nonetheless, we must live and if some amount of chaos exists then let it be acceptable chaos. However, doubt runs along side. So, when in doubt... fact check. 

When fact checking is required and that seems pretty much all the time, the process is based on an agreed upon framework, historical account. But, that's still shared information which is subject to flaws. How? One has to check the sources of information and check the sources provided as sources of information. 

What does any of that have to do with time travel? First, is time travel possible? I have to say Yes and No. Yes, because time though relative, we use it, we move through it. Yes, time is just as good a dimension as space because we're always moving through it. But, make no mistake, time, as we know it, is one dimensional. It exists as a linear line and contributes a single dimension to our conscious experience of three dimensions.

That's probably why Kurt Gödel's vision of time is not a physical dimension of space through which one could travel into the past or future. And, even if we could... which past or future would we travel to given our above discussion which states that history is subject to the entropic universe and well, that's probably why we have Mandela Effects. Moreover, all information in such a universe is subject to decay because its just information in a downward spiraling program. Just like in the game of telephone.

Now, what I can say and do is imagine that time travel is possible because I know that I really exist/live in the social imagination. The place where all social reality exists as I know it and suppose you know it as long as we are on the same page. If I wanted to control all the information in the world, I imagine that by rewriting history, changing what people remember, changing the social imagination, the social reality. 

What is really interesting about that, is how the Mandela Effect still creeps in. Whether I imagine it or not, I have to remember at all times how I remember something in order to travel back in 'time'. Now, when it comes to the future, its more open to possibilities. After all, everyone day dreams and those dreams can be pretty real. Now, if you live in your hopes/dreams... they can affect the present and also how you remember the past. And, that in your mind can change everything in the social imagination.

It can be kind of dangerous when you think about it... especially the hierarchy of social reality, society as in group of information entities with which we share information in a place over time. Dangerous how? What we imagine, remember, agree on, adhere to and change up has an effect on us and those around us including those even living far from us as in on the other side of the world. 

We might even change our perceptions and or views about others in this world just by time traveling in the social imagination. When it gets written down or just circulated on YouTube... problems in our wider social imagination social reality as in paradoxes, inconsistencies, contradictions, can arise. 

So, what's really going on is anyone's guess... right? Well, that may or may not be true depending on your social imagination. But, there must be something... some thread of truth, some real history, right?

Yes, there is! 

Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever ~ Hebrews 13:8.

What does it mean to be 'Woke' in the Social Imagination?

 

It ain't what it looks like... 

There is an old anecdote (among anthropologists and sociologists) about how language came to be. Or, let's say when it was first used and what for? So,... the story goes like this. 

Long ago, man in his 'evolving' state, was nearing transition (from ape to man). Back then, the transitory being lived in groups with an Alpha male dominating. He of course kept a harem of females. The young males would hang round waiting for an opportunity to steal one away for themselves in order to make off with her and start a new group. 

Now, one young male spied his chance. However, lustful unity prior to departure caused them to be found out by the Alpha male who quickly charged in their direction pounding his chest and snorting. 

The younger male was terrified of such an eminent confrontation not being of very big stature. Making calculations in his yet developing mind as to the best strategy of defense, he suddenly blurted out, "It ain't what it looks likes"!

Given all the uproar, the charging Alpha male, the screaming young female and the quickly gathering of other males and females around the two lovers... the Alpha male stopped dead in his tracks. He never heard anything like that before, And, without hesitation (to his utter amazement), he apologized, "Sorry dude. Guess I saw (past tense) it differently." 

Hence, not only was language born but the first Mandela Effect (misremembering/mishearing/mis-seeing). So, what does it mean to be 'Woke' in the social imagination (agreement and disagreement in the information reality) where Mandela Effects run rampant based on all kinds of top down, sideways and grass roots circulating and re-circulating of information, misinterpretation, shared news feeds that are misread, misunderstood, misremembered and not to mention misconstrued as situations? 

Well, given that, can anyone be 'really' woke? In the case of the birth of language, we might say yes. It appeared that both the younger and Alpha 'older' male woke up. But, what did they wake up to? That is the question. There is always somebody who doesn't see it that way or someone who tells it in another way... "It ain't what it looks like". The younger male woke up to pending death scenario and the older male was led to believe a lie.

The term woke was first used in the 1940s. It has resurfaced in recent years as a concept that symbolizes awareness of social issues and movement against injustice, inequality, and prejudice. But, you see, how can anyone be truly woke if we understand 'woke' as awareness or a consciousness on a higher level if no one actually knows the truth because no one can really know the truth in context of the group; but what is one man's truth against another anyway, right?

A group can only be aware of itself when it is unified as a group through agreement... what it is and is not. In order for that to happen, we see that it requires a kind of discrimination... who/what I am/we are and who/what I am/we are/are not. 

Everyone wants to be liked and no one wants to be dissed... but, we have to realize that if someone wants to be liked, they have an idea of why they want to be liked and how they want to be liked... that's already discrimination... self-discrimination. This applies to a group as well. This is who I am/we are and who I am not/we are not. 

That is the truth of being woke... knowing this truth which is the truth of agreement reality. Is it wrong? No, its just how we as human beings exist in an information reality that requires discernment (what is and what is not) and agreement (what is through agreeing in a place).

Sure, we can agree that social issues that address injustice, inequality (younger vs. older, gender, race and many other examples) and prejudice are important and most people do agree on those topics. But, its why they agree and what they see as agreeable solutions that differ. 

Some may not even see a problem because they are living as who they are and are not. This maybe a problem for others of course. But, they also live/exist in the same truths and they agree in the same way. They have their reasons to agree/disagree and they have their solutions which differ. And, in fact, they may cause problems for others that they are not aware of because they live as who they are and are not. 

Does everyone have the right to say... "It ain't what it looks like"? Probably. Why? Because, they are not actually woke (as we virtual signal) but awake to the truth of their being in a place over time and what that means to them and their group in that place and time. They justify their position just as the young male did but the Alpha male was also justified so who was in the wrong? 

Do we create language and thus false agreement and kick that farther through social media perhaps causing a Mandela effects that is used as an advantage? Do all things happen by the strangeness of differing perspectives? Are we caught in a strange loop of information that just seems to make sense and seems to be our 'truth' as that information was acquired in a place over time by like minded people? 

What's true for everyone everywhere is that we live in an information reality that takes place in the social imagination which has a real location, an address that is geographical and cultural. Its all been agreed on over time as 'that's how it is for us' in the place where we are. Our truth thus is a process of framing of who we are and are not in a place over time. We don't go about our lives thinking/contemplating that what we do is inherently wrong or bad or purposely organized to hurt anyone... 

We all just want to live and to live as happily and as freely as we can. I suppose that's what the young male thought and why he created his defense in such an articulated fashion. It caught his aggressor off guard and that changed things up for both. Were they 'woke' to that as we might want to think? Somebody was and somebody wasn't. Its what it looks to one and not another. But, that's the nature of the beast... the information reality.

 

*Jesus Christ... He is the way and the truth!

The Mandela Effect in the Social Imagination...

 

We live in a social imagination where agreement is necessary. I have described this many times; what we agree on becomes our social information reality. That means that the information we have, use and share has to mean something to us in the place where we are. It means something because we agree that it does. Without agreement, there is no social reality that we can say with certainty there it is... or I know what you mean. 

A group is defined by what it agrees with and even how it agrees... is it by means of democratic process or dictated from the top. Not only that, but culture and ethnicity affect information that is agreed on. Thus, between differing groups, information differs. That's because of meaning which arises for different groups in the place where they are in different ways and means. What one group holds sacred is different in meaning from others. 

Basically, agreement is necessary for any group no matter who they are and are not. They necessarily agree on a bulk or bit of information as it works and has been working in the place where they are over time and with a certain amount of success. And, thus they continue to agree as the information they use works fairly well to be worth agreeing on.

Now, every group has their own social pitfalls. You see, in every group, one might hear it one way and one another way. Is that a problem for the group? Yes, sure it is. But sooner or later, the one way will be agreed on over the other way. Does this suggest there a Mandela Effect when it comes to information heard, read, shared and agreed on? 

First of all, what is the Mandela Effect?

• LinkedIn
  The “Mandela effect” is a term coined by self-described “paranormal researcher” Fiona Broome for a type of mass “false memory” phenomenon in which large groups of people misremember a historical event. In this case, the phenomenon occurred on the internet in 2010, in which many people expressed their belief that Nelson Mandela had died in prison during his incarceration in the 1980s, despite the fact Mandela was actually freed in 1990 and went on to become the president of South Africa. According to some accounts, people who believed Mandela had died in prison claimed they remembered watching his funeral on television.
   
• Now, in an 'evolving' humanity, that can be a huge problem, right? Especially, when being right about something seems to be so important to people of any group/culture/society/state/nation/country... And, moreover, when science supposedly says its this way and not that way. Or, when one powerful country or organization says its this way and not any other way. Adding to that, we have to be able to correctly remember things ...correctly, right. Especially, in order to be forward thinking, forward looking,and forward progressing.
  
• 
  
• Given this, we might even ask what is information reality in the social imagination of consciousness and is it subject to the Mandela Effect? Before attempting to answer that, we can extend on that question asking what about what does it mean to remember what we hear in a real consciousness state? Do we actually really remember what we hear and see and remember it absolutely correctly? Or, do we hear/see only what we only want to hear and see... only what we want to agree with?  Serious questions... Now, the Mandela Effect calls it misremembering... is the Mandela Effect a perfect case of the strangeness of agreement reality. It is in fact a phenomenon to consider in context of 'real' agreement reality and the pitfalls of it.  
•  
• You might conclude its just a matter of misremembering but if we misremember enough and do so as a group... we will have change the past and will effect the present and future by remaining in an agreed upon Mandela Effect.   
• 
  
• Is there a way out? Yes...
  
• 
  
• Like an old 60's song says... "Tellin it like it is"!
  
  
  
  I don't care what they may say
  I don't care what they may do
  I don't care what they may say
  Jesus is just alright, oh yeah
  Jesus is just alright
  Jesus is just alright with me, Jesus is just alright, oh yeah
  Jesus is just alright with me, Jesus is just alright
  I don't care what they may know
  I don't care where they may go
  I don't care what they may know
  Jesus is just alright, oh yeah
  Jesus, he's my friend; Jesus, he's my friend
  He took me by the hand; Led me far from this land
  Jesus, he's my friend...
   
  He is my Hero!
  
• 
  
• In Him, we live, move and have our being ~ Acts 17:28... So, lean not on your own understanding ~ Proverbs 3:5.
  

The Age of Alternative News in the Social Imagination...

Many Americans Get News on YouTube...Where News Organizations and Independent Producers Thrive Side by Side...

Americans are as likely to often turn to independent channels as they are to established news organization channels; videos from independent news producers are more likely to cover subjects negatively, discuss conspiracy theories

What is the attraction with youtube? Well, its not unlike any other attraction in the social imagination. The attraction is based on the desire to interact and through interaction to reach agreement. Our social reality is in agreement. That's why, we all want to be heard and we want others to hear and agree with us. That is why agreement reality in which we live is the only place where we strive to be heard, are heard and can agree or not agree about what we heard. What we agree on becomes our reality because in agreement we find out who we are and are not and in that, we find comfort and peace. 

Who creates these youtube channels? Those who want to be heard and reach out to others seeking agreement reality. Those who watch... (rather than create a channel) watch to find people that they can agree with and thus, in agreement, channels either grow or fall away. This is real and more real than mainstream news because the corporate news sells us what they want us to hear whereas youtube channels come and go based on their ability to provide information most people agree with. Their channel depends on agreement among people and that essentially is what makes them very real indeed.  

Is it a crime or breach of social justice to provide information on a youtube channel? No! And, its not dangerous or just as dangerous as any news source. Why? Because, the same principles of agreement in the social imagination apply to all news sources youtubers and all the corporately owned and directed news channels (mainstream) which push their made up agenda. You see, people seek information and agreement because its the human condition to do so ...agreement is the reality of the social imagination. 

When it comes to youtube and the mainstream, most people will find what they are looking for or accept what they are told/handed to them because its all they can find or all they have and so they accept it because their need for agreement is so great that they end up agreeing with the mainstream or even a youtuber because its become their source of information their source of agreement reality... its is always there like a good neighbor and that alone is comforting for them.  

Whether on mainstream or on youtube, most needful people look for charismatic personalities as they freely surf youtube and or some just want a person who thinks like them or looks like them, talks like them and agrees with their world view. In fact, its about agreement all the way around. 

No matter how you look at it... agreement reality is how people find out and connect with who they are and are not and there is comfort and peace in that. In saying that, such truths apply to those who watch mainstream media regularly and nothing else. However, I must tell you that there is a difference and that is this... Youtubers come and go but mainstream media is there whether you like it or not. 

For the sake of wider and fair illustration, a study was done and this is what they found. 

     A new Pew Research Center study explores these questions in two ways: through a survey, conducted Jan. 6-20, 2020, among 12,638 U.S. adults that asked YouTube news consumers about their experiences on the website; and through an analysis of the most popular YouTube news channels and the contents of the videos published by a subset of these channels in December 2019. 

    The study finds a news landscape on YouTube in which established news organizations and independent news creators thrive side by side – and consequently, one where established news organizations no longer have full control over the news Americans watch.

    Not only that, but when YouTube news consumers were asked to describe in their own words why YouTube is a unique place to get news, the most common responses relate to the content itself – including access to news sources outside the mainstream and the plethora of different opinions and views that are available on the platform. Indeed, YouTube news viewers are about as likely to say they are primarily looking for opinions and commentary on the website (51%) as they are to say they are mostly seeking information and facts (i.e., “straight” reporting; 48%). 

Indeed, watchers are seeking information and facts... ones that they agree with for the most part. They may be curious when they find information that they don't initially agree with or different than what they expected. Then what happens? They either keep watching and begin to agree or they stop watching. 

Their decision to continue to watch is based on the personality they watch (both on mainstream and alternative). They continue to watch because there is something about them, the viewer feels a connection or an attraction and this is important in respect of continued watching. Even if its just a voice, they watch/listen because the information sounds interesting, attractive, or convincing enough and that convincing comes via the person who is delivering the information. 

Whatever your opinion is in regards to alternative news or youtube channels in general, its the future and more channels will appear and more voices will be heard whether you agree with them or not, somebody will. 

The question on anyone or everyone's mind should be... whose news is the real news? Well, that depends on your 'real' comfort level... go figure.

 

*Online source ~ https://www.journalism.org/2020/09/28/many-americans-get-news-on-youtube-where-news-organizations-and-independent-producers-thrive-side-by-side/

The Desire for a Superhero in the Social Imagination...

 

     

 

If you recall, several months ago, the topic of the hero was put forward. It was recognized that people, social actors, create ideal-types, a sort of measuring stick that captures the most rational and most essential components of any social thing. Ideal-types are never found in their pure form in real life. But, make no mistake, they do serve us in real life. 

 

How? They appear in the form of the ‘hero’. This is an individual person who overcomes a situation either for the group or for themselves. They can become legendary, a myth but also a real entity as the savior, rescuer, the hope giver... because, he or she has risen above given circumstances as an demonstration for all to rise above.

Max Weber wrote intensively on ideal-types. They are necessary for any society as ideal types formulate the realized conception of what man could and or should be within their given social and socio-cultural landscape. 

  

Max Weber observed that, individuals living in a well- defined group in a place over time, there exists not just an idea of who I am and am not among those around me and also how those around me shape my identity as a being in a group but a type, an ideal type of who I am and am not. This expression of identity belongs to all individuals in the group.

 

This does not mean that any one individual in the group thinks of themselves as an ideal type or that anyone among them is it ... yet some do arise to the call of 'hero'. Its more about their mutual agreement that an ideal type of them exists. This is arrived at through being in a place over time, generations of social interactions (real applications and abstract) that produce both successes and failures.

Weber, ideal-types rose out of that observed social phenomenon. Weber took it to another level as he defined those ideal types expressed in three forms of domination and subordination in action. The first type is charismatic domination, or power based on the exceptional qualities of an individual, such as his or her heroism or sanctity. The second type of legitimate domination is traditional domination, or power that is justified by a belief in long-standing customs in a place that work positively for the group in that place. 

Generally speaking, the hero is the overcomer, the one who rises above and this is not because the hero is determined to be a hero. In fact, the greater hero is not known unto him/herself as a hero nor to others until they are in the act of being one. This type of hero is the hero of old had meaning for everyone in his/her group. The real hero or the true hero is always the one who makes it through not only for him/herself but for everyone in their group... Moreover, the greatest hero of old, of all time, had and still has meaning for all people everywhere. 

 

Today's hero is an exhibitionist, he/she is the one who seeks to survive a process as a learning experience. In this sense, the survivor hero is simply the one who makes it through. There is no greater or just cause; just look at me and what I stand for; hence, the virtual signaler.

 

Today's hero is the 'lone' survivor as if no one else ever struggles or suffers and this is usually seen in a person who survives a bully encounter, an illness or accident or some malady. Not that the heroes of old didn't struggle with overcoming this world as it is... they did; but, they did it not only for themselves but for others.

  

Essentially, we should consider how the hero is even contemplated whatsoever... Does this icon in the social imagination serve a larger purpose? Why do we desire a hero and even a super-hero? Sure, you can hear people say that they believe in humanity as if humanity by itself is a hero. But, at every turn, we can read in the papers that humanity fails. Maybe that is why Hollywood is still putting out hero and superhero films. Of course, they put out every day Joe hero; but, they really draw the crowds to the ticket box with superheroes. 

Who or what is the superhero? Most everyone knows superman and a host of others that have all kinds of super powers. Such an ideal type truly overrides the plain ole hero. This type is super extraordinary to the point that death escapes them for all time. Believing in something or someone greater than yourself, greater than man is extraordinary. Atheists believe in either the state in this way or themselves. 

Different cultures also have such a type even if he or the multitudes don't offer eternal life. Or perhaps the superhero is just the ability to harness nature, or overcome the constrains of this world even if it is just because they (this or the many superheroes) can or it pleases them; thus their human 'non-superhero' followers applaud this with offerings and or sacrifices. 

 

Whatever... it does appear that man no matter who or where he is, desires a greater image of himself to help, to guide, to rescue and to live forever. How did man come up with that idea? Did it evolve? If yes, what would the point of that be? Wouldn't it be better in the chain of evolution that man just become man and live as a man and die as a man?

 

Why would he think that man is either everything or nothing in the great scheme of things? There must be a greater reason for his being just a man and that a greater reason has a greater cause and purpose and reach...if we just seek Him. The desire of our heart and our soul! Isaiah 26:8 ~ " Your name and renown are the desire of our souls."

Is such a superhero only in our mind? Isn't all of social reality? Our social reality exists in the social imagination... an information reality that uploads and downloads information... houses it, stores it, shares it, disables it and reclaims it. And, in that reality, we desire and even need to imagine that there is but one key source of all information which supersedes all other information in truth and in light.

 

In the Social Imagination of Proponents of Critical Race Theory...

 

The basic tenets of CRT include that racism and disparate racial outcomes are the result of complex, changing and often subtle social and institutional dynamics rather than explicit and intentional prejudices on the part of individuals.

Commentary- Yes, that is true. But, who is asking who composes social and institutional dynamics? Individuals. You see, people are part of a group/society/culture in a given place and they are shaped by that existence 'being in a place over time' with similar social actors. That means that those raised in a group are shaped by that group and they are part of that group.

Human beings al over the world, in every society, culture and group/tribe know who they are and are not simply by being in a place over time the sharing information they have been given/used and at hand in the place where they are; largely, because it works for them in that place at least with enough successful that they continue that sharing as a 'practice' that works. 

As for anyone outside of that shared information as a 'practice', they are and will continue to be outside of it; unless, they themselves decide to leave what they are and integrate into another group... just like being in a gang. The newbie has to prove him or herself... that they have left the old behind and are ready to be made new.

It can be explained by an analogy of in group/out group. People who are tall do have a certain vantage point and most of the time they don’t look down. They live in the clouds so to speak; but that’s not bad or wrong. It’s just their reality. Because they live on a level that others don’t and have a different perspective. It's this way for people who are of one social status vs another. It's this way for people of one kind of culture or geography vs. another.

People live with  the information they have been given and or have at hand. It’s a normal operation. Now, if some find themselves outside of a certain information reality or within a majority of people who share in one kind of information over another… then those who do not share the same information reality can feel left out... if that is even really possible. But, you can’t force one reality over and or on top of another without being guilty of doing what ‘you’ are criticizing… not sharing an embedded information reality that was culminated over a period of time in a place.

Even in saying that, how on earth could anyone from one reality group even know or understand on any ‘real’ level what the group that they criticize is thinking or doing. That is like saying you know and understand aliens and you feel left out from their planet.

Anyone who is not raised or shaped by a group in a place over time cannot know in any concrete ‘clear’ unbiased way what the group they criticize is really like. Let alone that they are being excluded by it.

It would be like monkeys at the zoo complaining that the lions get more attention. How would the monkeys even be able to recognize or understand that is what is happening to them? And, how would they be able to exclusively discern why they think they are not getting the same attention and that the lions know very well that they are getting more attention?

CRT scholars also view race and white supremacy as an intersectional (crossing over and mixing) social construction which serves to uphold the interests of white people against those of marginalized communities at large. 

Commentary- Firstly, how could someone make the statement that they are not a racist and yet recognize someone as being ‘white’ and worse being a white supremacist? Labeling people is racist. Its not surprising that self-labeling or group recognition is not new. Its still about knowing and displaying who you are and are not. This is done by the in-group inasmuch as its done by the out-group... those who want to be in. Those on the inside are always maintaining who they are and are not through shared information in a place over time. Every society/culture, group/tribe does this. Its about sustainability.

 A key CRT concept is intersectionality (analytical framework for the concept of intersectional), which emphasizes that race can intersect with other identities (such as gender and class) to produce complex combinations of power and disadvantage.

Commentary- This is true. Its like the melting pot of America. Or, what was once the melting pot of the United States. If one is seeking to divert from its given group in order to become like another, then the group which is being sought obviously has advantages that are preferred over their own group. Isn't that why people from all over the world came to America?

You need to hang out with that group, learn the lingo, learn the steps, learn the means of transportation. Its not the other way around… why would it be, unless you apply the politics of accommodation wherein you become like them from a distance and they move toward your group.

Academic critics of CRT argue that it relies on social constructionism, elevates storytelling over evidence and reason, rejects the concepts of truth and merit, and opposes liberalism

Commentary- If there is anything to agree with its social constructionism (information shared by a group in a place over time) … which is true for all people everywhere, it’s because we are talking about the human condition and processing of shared information in a place over time. The reality of either in-groups or out-groups is shaped/formed due to the working out of social dynamics in the place they are. This is observed not only among diverse groups attempting to cohabitate in the same place ‘geographically’ but within like groups and within the in-group. This is true in political structures, and in corporate hierarchies.

The only truth we can say about CRT is that "there is always somebody who don't like somebody"... Ray Charles.