Spectrum Street Epistemology is a critical thinking method developed by Peter Begoian that requires individuals to state any claim, assign a degree of certainty (from strongly agree to strongly disagree), and explain the evidence and reasoning behind that certainty. This method is demonstrated through a live discussion at Rockyview Hospital examining whether Leroy Little Bear's legacy should be celebrated at the University of Lethbridge, where he served as Vice Provost of Indigenous Relations. The discussion reveals how this epistemological framework exposes problematic claims, such as the assertion that 'indigenous knowledge is valid' (which is challenged as potentially excluding universal knowledge), and critically examines the university's celebration of Little Bear despite his alleged support for student mob behavior that shut down academic discussions about residential school genocide. The session illustrates how Spectrum Street Epistemology can be used to evaluate controversial academic claims and institutional practices.
Spectrum Street Epistemology - Should Leroy Little Bear's Legacy Be Celebrated?
Added:And I've got a power pack here as well.
I have >> here's Morgan Johnson.
>> Hello.
>> Why don't you introduce yourself, Morgan?
>> Oh god.
I'm in Canada. [laughter] And Canada is crazy.
>> Oh my god. Yeah, that's me. I'm an independent journalist.
>> Okay. Excellent. And here's Kathy Drake.
>> Howdy. Would you want to introduce yourself to the uh to the audience?
>> Um uh [laughter] >> may I hope they already know me a little bit.
>> I hope they know Kathy. You're kind of you're you're notorious. [laughter] >> Well, I just feel like the niche audience probably has already been following along a little bit.
>> Okay. Okay.
>> Yeah. I'm >> And then the man of the hour. You want to be on camera, Albert?
Albert Howard.
[laughter] Albert, you are a patient here at Rocky View.
>> Yes, I am.
>> Do you want to tell people why you're a patient here?
>> I'm a psychiatric patient. [laughter] Had a lot of >> my my contact with reality is not very funny.
>> Okay.
Uh I don't know what this thing is about here but so I'm not going to be neutral.
>> Okay.
>> But uh >> cuz I'm never neutral.
>> Okay. So what we're doing here is we're doing uh what Peter Begoian has developed which is called spectum sheet epistemology. Mhm.
>> And what you do with spectum street epistemology is you have any claim and then you have to state your degree of certainty about that claim and then you're asked questions about why you're so certain or or lack certainty and what evidence you're using to reach your level of certainty.
>> What would be an example of one of those claims?
>> The remains of 215 children have been confirmed at the Cam Lucian Residential School.
>> So what would you be how certain would you be? It it can be any claim, but this is just one that's particularly near and dear to my heart because I've been studying it now for the last 5 years.
>> But if you were to have that claim, would you be on uh what what what mat would you be on in terms of uh would you strongly agree? Would you strongly disagree? Would you absolutely disagree?
>> Well, I I don't have enough information to make >> Okay, but like would you be on neutral because you don't really know what what it's all about?
>> I guess I would make me neutral.
>> Okay. So, if you just don't know what what to think about something, you just put yourself on neutral and you wait to hear the arguments of everyone that's going to be doing it.
>> Um, but today, the claim that we're going to be looking at, first of all, because I was supposed to be in Lethbridge today, um, drawing attention to the circumstances of Leroy Little Bear's uh, in my view destruction of the academic character of the University of Lbridge. And so, the claim that we're looking at today, I'm just going to bring this over here.
This is a question. You can do either or more. So, >> sorry. I'm just going to put this here.
>> We're looking at the question about Leroy, the celebration of of Leroy Little Bear's legacy. And if you look at that, that's what Leroy Little Bear said is when when uh Anthony Hall and I and you you were there as well, Albert, and you probably remember that with some a degree of horror.
>> And Helena, Anony's wife, we were subjected to unbelievable abuse and intimidation at that event. And Leroy Little Bear said that the students did a fantastic job in neutralizing her and in in relationship to her it was he was talking about me. So it's it's a little bit I was a little bit of a a gas to see that this person who was celebrating that this horrible behavior of students is going to have his legacy celebrated by the University of Lethbridge. That's because Leroy a little bear doesn't have confidence in his views.
>> So he's got to resort to some kind of social violence to stop people from doing it >> or Yeah. Or >> the fundamental basis of fascism.
>> Yeah. Anyway, so I don't I was supposed to be in Lethbridge today drawing attention to this problem, but since uh everything seemed a little bit uncertain in terms of the health situation, I thought we should bring Lethbridge to Rocky View Hospital. So, that's what we're doing right now is we're going to be doing this. Um, so Morgan, >> yep.
>> Do you want to put this on your tripod?
We're going to just put this camera.
>> I think you got a good angle, but your phone might be different than my phone.
>> Okay. And so, uh, you're going to It might turn I don't know about turning it.
>> Can you do it? Yeah. Do it vertically cuz if you turn it, it's going to shut off.
>> Yep. Oops. I really apologize. Okay, >> everyone.
>> You want me to hold it?
>> Yep. Yep. Sorry. Go.
Okay. And >> now, uh, >> that's just the battery pack.
>> I'm not sure what to do with it, but I think actually, I thought you even >> maybe I can just disconnect it. I'll just disconnect.
>> Okay.
>> Cuz it's it's 100% charged, so it should be okay.
>> Yep.
I'm just going to take this.
>> I will also be checking my DMs, so if you want to send in any questions or comments in DMs, you can be anonymous.
And you're on the bike path, so you might want to just move it in if you can.
>> Or I can tell you uh tell your account if you want it. You're kind of blocking.
You want to you want to kind of move it off. But in fact, I think maybe we can move >> the mask. I think we should move the mask.
>> That's a good idea. Okay, >> so just get off the bike. Yeah.
>> And you should really kind of have it more around so it's closer in.
>> Mhm.
>> Okay.
Looks good. I think we'll uh you know we can kind of >> we we off the bike path.
>> Yeah. Yeah.
>> There you go.
>> Kind of trying to uh >> Yeah.
>> And we'll also just >> Am I vis what's what's the uh framing like here?
>> You're perfect.
>> Okay.
>> Right in center. Yeah, very good.
[laughter] >> Can you see the whole thing?
>> Yeah. Oh, let me see. You are Yes. So, you've been uh fantastic job of neutralizing her in brackets, Francis Widowen.
>> So, this this billboard here uh which has on the other side I don't know which one that one is, but the remains of children and the denialism and so on.
>> That's the ones that I were using. So, what I do is I just turn it around now if I want to have another issue that we're going to be looking at. And today, I was going to be at the university, sorry, at Excite Lethbridge, uh, where Leroy Little Bear's legacy is being celebrated with a huge gala thing where they're charging $150 a plate. And I believe it's $1,200 for a table that that's what it's going to cost. And uh I thought that because of the way that Leroy Little Bear was celebrating this absolutely atrocious behavior of the student body that people should at least consider whether that was a good thing or not to be celebrating his uh legacy.
And so I was going to be with Morgan.
Morgan and I were going to go down and we were going to um stand at the side at the entrance. So we would be just kind of as people were driving in, we would uh we would sort of say, "Hey, is this is this something that should go without question?" And uh so now what we're going to do is since we want to bring to Rocky View Hospital, we want to take a claim about this. So the claim is can either be Leroy Little Bear should be celebrated.
His legacy should be celebrated. That's one claim. Or it could be Leroy Little Bear's legacy should not be celebrated.
So So that would be the the two possibilities that you could do. I'm going to do the uh the positive side of it. I usually try to do that. And then as well, it's the opposite one to what I hold myself. And so it's going to be the legacy of Leroy Little Bear who is the vice provost of Iniscum Indigenous Relations at the University of Lethbridge should be celebrating. We should be celebrating that. So that that whole gala that's been going on and all the kind of things and it's happening actually probably about starting to happen in about an hour um whether we agree or disagree and so on. That's what we're looking at today.
And uh I'm going to uh so it should be the the uh the legacy of little Leroy little bear should be celebrated.
>> So we don't have mics. So we just got to keep that in mind. The sound was good, but >> just make sure we project. But >> you might want to just move the uh you might want to move it up here. So, >> is that on? Can you see it?
>> Yeah, >> cuz I couldn't.
>> No, >> you have to look straight in, I guess.
>> I know. Yeah.
>> So, I'm on the strongly disagree >> for the claim. Which claim?
>> The legacy of [snorts] Leroy Little Bear should be celebrated.
>> And I'm on the strongly disagree.
>> Strongly disagree.
>> Yeah, >> I'm uh Yeah. Which mat are you on?
Eventually, I I might uh pull one on everyone and say that we should uh we should strongly absolutely draw attention to Leroy Little Bear.
>> Do you want to be on strongly or are you on? Absolutely.
>> Well, I'm not celebrating him, but so I'm I'm being tricky.
>> Okay.
>> Do you think it might be a little bit too much for people to handle? Well, why don't you why don't you argue the strongly agreed position?
>> Well, I think that he is so >> or do you want to argue the absolutely agreed position?
>> Well, I think it's so insane some of the things I've investigated that I think if people really understood the insanity that's going on on campuses, we should like it should be known by everyone how crazy it's gotten. So I think it should be absolutely a national uh uh scandal uh the things that are going on in our universities.
>> Yeah. But then you would be on the do you think that by celebrating him you're you're feeding feeding into the support for your drawing attention to the scandalous freedom of expression problems on university campuses. Well, in that sense, it comes down to the word celebrate because I think if I were celebrating the absolute insanity, it would be um in a negative way. So, I would be saying like we absolutely should be like blowing it open. Everyone should know about it. It's nuts. And it's not really a celebration though.
So, >> but but are you is that are you really addressing the clean?
>> Right. The claim is should we be celebrating the legacy >> of Leroy Little Bear?
>> So it doesn't have anything to do with whether >> the like what may be tangentially kind of related.
>> Yeah.
>> But on that claim, >> what are you going to be arguing?
>> What would I be arguing? I think that uh mobbing it's inciting mobs on a campus on a false basis and with unbelievable laundered uh qualification.
That is so unbelievable in >> Okay. So, where are you going to be? Are you going to be here?
>> Well, I'm kind of >> I will if you're going to be there, I'm going to I'm going to uh I'm going to take the uh >> the opposite position. And this is not my view, right?
>> Because I definitely do not think that Leroy Little Bear's legacy should be celebrated because I think that Leroy Little Bear is one of the key uh people who um has destroyed the academic character of the University of Lethbridge.
>> So anyway, but >> so you'll be steel manning >> I'm going to be steel manning this. I I I don't understand the absolutely agree and disagree. I assume that's the religious position.
>> Is it always or could it also just be a mathematical position like 2 plus 2 equals 4?
>> I absolutely agree with that. Is that religiosity or is that just >> um I I would Yeah. Well, it's it's certain. It's absolute certainty.
And I I never am absolutely certain about anything because I always want to leave like a slight room for um changing like having evidence presented to to change my mind.
>> Right. Okay.
>> Okay. So, I'm going to start off with uh the main reason why I think if I were to argue that Leroy Little Bear's legacy should be celebrated, I would say because the administration has taken the position that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's calls to action should be adopted into that. That seems to be one of its highest values at the University of Lethbridge that the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's calls to action be adopted by the university.
>> H >> and it has said that its values are uh contrary to the values of Francis Widow or the the values that Francis Widowen holds. So therefore, Leroy Little Bear was just upholding the um the position of the university. Like he's an administrator.
>> Mhm.
>> He's supposed to be upholding what it is that the administration is putting forward. And so he's upholding those values and he sees the students in the way that they were acting as upholding those values.
And so why should why shouldn't he be celebrated for being a an administrator who is just supporting the values of the University of Lebridge? But the University of Lethbridge has said they really this is what they're all about and the students took heed of that and they all arrived to try to stop those values from being threatened and Leroy Little Bear stood behind the uh behind those values. So is that what he's being celebrated for specifically is for upholding the values of the university or is it just for uh filling time in that spot? Is there a list of things that the university is claiming he's being celebrated for in particular?
>> Um well they did mention he has integrated indigenous knowledge into the that's one of the things that he's famous for. Oh >> okay. is uh he uh University of Lathbridge uh started off I can't it's I'm not sure how old it is but certainly the indigenous studies program has been around for 50 years and Leroy Little Bear was the the main figure for bringing in the indigenous studies program and one of the mo main things that this did is that it it incorporated indigenous knowledge into that program and then through indigenization, indigenous knowledge was brought into all aspects of the university. So that's that's what he's and so >> I feel like we need to define that term, but first let's go >> y >> to uh Morgan.
>> I I know the uh sun is like frying me all of a sudden, but uh >> do you want my hat?
>> No, no, no. I'm just trying to think. I don't want to just bet veer off on a different point that's disconnected to the one we're talking about. So I was thinking that what Francis is really talking about is the role in the institution and the institution's values >> and that you know I I don't have it all memorized. I know there's a lot of court cases with the university. Um but you know I've seen the behavior of the faculty association. I know the celebration, the gala that is happening today is there um as part of the indigenous studies program and the endowment for the uh scholarship program. And it it's shaped more like a corporate uh fundraiser. And to me, I I keep asking myself, who would show up to this? It's about $150 per uh ticket, and I think it's um over a,000 or something for for a table to attend. That was the same price for uh Francis's dinner where we were where Francis was celebrated.
>> But but but this one I feel like is um really fascinating to me because it's it's it's more like a corporate kind of sponsorship. It's a corporate takeover.
>> Well, yeah. Um >> yeah, >> that's not really here. So, do you believe that Leroy Little Bear's legacy is worth celebrating? And you're saying you strongly disagree.
>> Is that >> on on the basis that he should not be celebrated? I think everyone should know about some of the things that are going on in the universities. I think that that's not a celebration. So that's where Francis and I kind of swapped places is um so when it comes down to the activity at the universities I was thinking you know these celebrations are unbelievable in the face of so many scandals and um just the more we investigate the more it it becomes just unbelievable.
>> Well regardless of any other circumstances >> Mhm.
>> if uh you know money is not an object none of that matters. Okay. Yep.
>> Do you think the actual celebration itself is worthwhile to take place >> to take? No. I I think that having a academic program is completely different from having a sort of a an echo chamber that just has predetermined positions that are not based in reality.
So to me the whole program is not entirely >> right >> ac it it may belong it may belong in society for sure I think everyone has a right to form organizations and form societies of >> okay so I'm going to try and summarize your argument >> so Morgan seems to be arguing that since Leroy little bears the University of Lethbridge should be an academic institution because Leroy Little Bear's legacy is to um undermine that academic character of the institution.
This should not be celebrated.
>> Mhm.
>> Is that your position?
>> Well, I I'm also taking a shot at the uh whether indigenous studies itself is a academic category.
>> Okay.
>> Because I think it's sort of questionable if that if the quality of that program is academic.
>> Okay. So the argument then is is that Leroy Little Bear because he brought in indigenous studies and indigenous studies is not an academic program >> that bringing in indigenous studies has had a negative impact on the academic character of the University of Lbridge and therefore Leroy Little Bear's influence should not be celebrated >> because of his bringing indigenous studies which watered down the academic content of the Well, I you know if if indigenous studies wanted to be academic, it might belong in history or political science or you know maybe like I don't know about some other categories but to me indigenization is not the same as an academic discipline whereas indigenous studies seems like a concentration of something >> that could exist as an academic subject But if we're looking at the behavior of University of Lethbridge, I mean, inciting mobs >> on the basis of emotion and nothing existing, you know, and also a lot of uh a lot of other concerns.
shutting down the character of an academic institution by destroying its uh open inquiry, its uh pluralism, its defense of freedom of expression and freedom of uh association. I think that those are grave uh indicators that it's not academic. So is your position then that uh that that that uh quote that's attributed to Leroy Little Bear that students uh did a fantastic job in shutting down the discussion on February 4th. Is that the main reason why you don't think that his legacy should be celebrated?
Well, I think that referring to a mob as students again, you know, if if the university has lost its academic character >> and it exists as mobs of predetermined goals that have nothing to do with reality, >> then I would say I'm not sure that they're students. I feel like they're maybe being scammed a little bit if they're paying tuition, if they actually are buying into something. I'm not sure what the value proposition is.
>> So, but these were, as far as I understand it, the the the the quote unquote mob.
>> Mhm.
>> Were students, people who were paying tuition at the University of Lethbridge.
They're students in the sense that they have a student number >> and they, you know, they're they're enrolled, they paid money, >> they're enrolled at the University of Lebridge. They might not be students in the sense that they are openly and and cur and if they are curious they are open they are investigating matters and they are using reason evidence and logic to try to understand the world more completely like that's not that's not necessarily what's going on there >> um for people to say >> we just do not want this question that's what we on February 4th what was happening was that the question of whether or not residential schools were genocidal.
That was being examined where Anthony Hall, professor emeritus, uh was going to say that he thought there was evidence for the residential schools being schools being genocidal and I, Francis Widowen, was going to argue that I did not think that there was evidence for the residential schools being genocidal and we were going to be trying to figure out whether we could be convinced by the each other's position and the evidence that would be put being put forward. The students said that that should not happen at the University of >> La.
>> That's what they were saying is that they were just going to shut down the discussion and they were going to use violence and any means necessary to make that happen. And it was really only nine police officers who stopped uh you know us from really being you know manhandled by this angry group. And actually Tony Hull when the police left he was, you know, basically a whole huge group of people came and and pushed him outside and threw him to the ground outside on the patio.
So that's is that is that the kind of him saying that that was fantastic that happening?
>> Is that why you were taking issue with uh his uh legacy being celebrated? I think that that is a huge part of it.
Huge. And and just to slow it down, you know, I think that the more I learn about um you know, that there there's problems here in Calgary at Mount Royal as well that have taken a lot of inspiration from Little Bear. Um, I won't go too much into it, but I think Little Bear's historical legacy was also uh amending or being part of informing the amendment of the constitution.
>> I think that was in 1980s, 1982.
So this uh this legacy of not only just um mobbing disagreement and shutting down >> ideas that may be >> um you know of a different idea than than his own.
>> I think that he actually does have a really existing legacy in the formation of our constitution >> and by degrading it actually. So I would say it's >> okay. So let's see. So that because Leroy Little Bear was influential in aspects of the constitution like section 35 which is Aboriginal and treaty rights, uh existing Aboriginal treaty rights should be affirmed and because affirming Aboriginal and treaty rights has a very destructive impact on the Canadian political system, his legacy should not be celebrated.
>> I I think I would sum that up as I think you got it.
>> Yeah.
>> Yeah. Um, so in terms of the others, the uh the position of the strongly agree, I'm just trying to think of the justification for Leroy Little Bear's celebration of the attempts to neutralize Francis Widow. So that's that's what the students were trying to neutralize me by preventing me from speaking and uh pushing me off campus and and making you know things so terrible, so abusive that most people wouldn't have been able to stick it out. Um, and I think it was interesting because there was a a there was a media coverage of the story which had a big sign which said residential school denialism is violence. That's what the sign said.
And that seems to me to be a justification for why Leroy Little Bear would have um asserted that um neutralization was appropriate.
Because if you're going to have people on campus who are saying things which are violent, shouldn't you then be able to use violence to stop those violent things from being said?
that seems to be an implication of what was going on. And so that's kind of the the nature of the debate that that was that was happening. So if you think that saying that um the the remains of 215 children have not been confirmed at the Camel City Residential School and that is seen as being violent, then there's justification like a kind of a self-defense argument because if if someone is violent towards you, you have legal justification for using violence to stop that violence, then you could actually uh have students using violence to stop people from engaging in >> well to to respond to that I think prior to violence like prior to a mob of students uh Francis I was thinking there's an epistemic crisis so there's a huge problem at the university I think the big problem would be testing whether the mob even knows what your actual positions are because I think that they don't they seem to have a predetermined sort of um idea and they may differ from person to person. So so to me academic institutions are supposed to figure out well what do people really think and then compare and maybe uh argue between them. So that doesn't seem to be.
>> So uh would you be arguing then that uh >> migraine?
Um because the if we are to assume that my views are violent, if that's the assumption, then you'd have to know what my views were to make that determination. And because I was not allowed to speak and sort of say what my views were, >> stopping it from happening is is kind of is a problem because never would be able to actually make any determination about that. So Leo Leroy little bear um what is it saying? Uh neutralizing me and stopping me from speaking was was a fantastic thing. Well, then that's a problem because it doesn't allow people to actually understand what my views are and therefore they might be actually acting violently against something which is not really violent. Like they they can't really understand whether my views are violent or not unless they can actually give me a hearing to make that determination.
Well, so I I know that the mob I I feel like the mob was done an injustice because they were influenced by a lot of emotion and a lot of inability to know what they were even mobbing about. So for me, I understand that. But I guess to push back Francis, I think that Leroy Little Bear is the administrator.
he his qualifications are a little dubious and uh I guess for me to see him make so many comments.
>> So So why do you think that his qualifications are dubious?
>> Well, you know, he has a background in law. Uh he has a lot honorary degrees are more of a public relations gesture that he he does not have really much background in uh in history or science.
And um I would I would say that his ideas of indigenous science are quite problematic. And uh also just on the topic that you study which is um you know the the history of the residential schools and indigenous policy. I would say that I am not convinced that a academic administrator is demonstrating to me that they even understand what your ideas are before they judge you.
So, uh, what would you say to people who that Leroy Little Bear, one of his qualifications is that he is thoroughly immersed in the culture of the black folk. So, he lives among he has grown up, he's in a traditional kind of situation.
He's got all these connections of people who embrace the black culture and so on.
And so, wouldn't that make him well qualified to make pronouncements on the nature of the residential schools and whether or not something is residential school denialism?
>> Oh, that's a good one, Francis.
I might uh might even just go more extreme. So I think he uh you know I think from growing up in the modern society where where things are reasonable and things are logical, we we have a fairly common sense way of finding out whether something is true or false. Um I'm simply not convinced that he has much knowledge about the subject. And then the culture and then the subjects may be different things.
So his culture may not be the same subject as the residential school.
>> Uh political issues facing Canadians today.
>> Did he go to a residential school?
>> Yes, he did.
>> So that would give him a more knowledge.
>> Yeah. So he went to a residential school. I believe it's called St. Mary's was the residential school. In fact, I was just hearing him talk about this recently and uh I don't I've never heard him say whether he felt that it benefited him or not. He did it he did make some kind of comments about how he had heard people talk about how the residential schools were an institution that enabled control to be exercised over the Aboriginal population. and this was a big problem or he was implying there was a big problem. Um, and it would be interesting to sort of see if if Leroy Little Bear's views on the residential schools have have changed.
Um, so yeah, so he's a would be I don't know if he's ever referred to himself as a residential school survivor, which is often the uh is often the things that you you hear said. He went quite late.
He was I believe he said that he was nine or 10 years old when he began his studies at the residential school. So and he grew up speaking the Blackfoot language. So he grew up in quite a traditional kind of setting.
>> Okay. So can I propose a new claim?
>> Okay.
>> Uh >> you go you got to go into neutral. Oh yeah.
>> Is indigenous knowledge >> know what's the claim though?
>> What's the claim?
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. Sorry. Indigenous knowledge is valid.
>> So okay.
I don't Oh jeez. I'm gonna I'm gonna go disagree because I I I could be open. I could be open. You know, >> you could be open.
>> I could be swayed.
>> Okay. This is good cuz you guys are both in the frame.
>> Perfect.
>> Okay. So, I can come out here.
>> Okay.
>> Yeah.
>> Okay. So, [laughter] indigenous knowledge.
>> What are you doing?
>> What are we doing?
>> Came up to these three people talking.
They must be doing something.
>> Now, we're doing something. We're looking at the claim and you're rehearsing.
>> You can come over here with us if you want.
>> You're rehearsing it, right?
>> It's live right now.
>> Yeah, we're we're on the >> We're just talking to each other.
>> So, we are just talking to ourselves.
>> Saw one woman walk by and glance, but that was it.
>> It's the audience.
>> They always think we're crazy while we're out and about.
>> So, then the claim is indigenous knowledge is valid.
>> Is valid.
>> Okay. So, Francis strongly >> So, I'm on the strongly disagree. Yeah.
Absolutely agree.
>> You're on the >> Make sure that we're out in the frame.
>> Absolutely.
>> Absolutely. So, you're 100%.
>> First of all, it's not knowledge.
Knowledge is only something that is true.
>> Knowledge is only something that is true.
>> Absolutely. Have knowledge. You can't have knowledge that there's cheese on the moon.
>> You can't have knowledge that there's cheese on the moon. Okay. So, what is indigenous knowledge?
>> I don't there's no there's no such thing as indigenous knowledge. There's only one kind of knowledge for everyone and that is recognition of the truth.
>> Well, I I I might try at it. That's and I'm kind of in the more open sort of uh like I could be swayed depending on what the subject is and how we define it.
>> Nice and loud.
>> So, uh you know, as policy and the constitution was modified, um basing laws and policies off of a race mysticism and grievances to me enshrining rights on those bases seems almost not modern. It seems like it's a a step back to more of a neoal or a feudal sort of situation that that was before uh the enlightenment. So to me, knowledge on the basis of race, mysticism, or grievances is not likely to be very objective and it's not going to be very fair.
>> Knowledge based on race.
>> Well, it's my beef with it. Okay.
>> And so I'm not on the absolutely disagree because I I never am on the absolutely uh thing because I I I I need if someone's going to I have to listen to the opposing argument. And so I could be 99.9% on the So I'm, you know, 99.9% on the strongly disagree on that because if you put an ethnicity in front of knowledge, it's no longer knowledge.
>> What is it?
>> It's a it's an an ethnically based um identity promotion kind of exercise.
So they want to be given. If you if you argue for indigenous knowledge, you're arguing that only indigenous people can know this particular thing and that invalidates the idea of knowledge which is a universal.
>> Okay. So in their in the in the world of Leroy little bear in his mind >> where does indigenous knowledge come from?
>> The creator.
>> The creator. So is it is that this indigenous ways of knowing? Yes.
>> Or is it also experiential?
>> Well, there's there when you cuz anyone like the with respect to the experiential that could just be an unrepresented unrepresentative experience. So it's not knowledge. It's just a a a possible a possibility which would have to be verified through like the the ranges of experience that would then um give the systematic evidence required to say that something is knowledge. So your experience doesn't necessarily mean that this is what you believe is knowledge because your experience could be unrepresentative of the general kind of um situation >> right but could you not uh like you could say uh you know China had a knowledge system perhaps you know they used uh um you know different uh like the abacus or different things that would there be different knowledge systems dialectric >> or would that be regional?
>> That's people coming to the right conclusion through different paths.
>> That happens all the time >> and and anyone can learn how to use an abacus like like although the Chinese uh I believe invented the abacus and the abacus was a big part of their culture in in the various kind of contexts. A non-Chinese person could just come in and start using the abacus and understand everything about the abacus.
So that's what that's what we're getting at with the knowledge. The idea of knowledge is that knowledge is not something that a particular ethnic group can claim.
In order for something to be knowledge, you have to convince everyone that the evidence actually supports this particular position. But could there be a particular uh mindset or um like for example if you're if you're indigenous and you don't have any uh counting system >> you none some and many >> you might view the world >> you or you would view the world in a very different way would that be considered a different >> less >> not different less >> I >> it's less precise less like like that's the kind of confusion that often happens in these discussions is that something that's less developed is seen as being just a different way of doing something.
when it's actually doesn't have the the the systematic or the the evidence-based kind of character that you have when you have the scientific method. Like that's generally the if you listen to Leroy Little Bear, which I have done over the last several days, I've looked at quite a few videos, you know, he just makes like these comments that um like indigenous physics is about waves, not about particles.
Indigenous physics is about um it's not about measurement. It's about relationships.
>> And you're going, what does that even mean? I don't even know what he's talking about. That's why and >> that makes two of you.
>> Is it also is it strange to um give an entire group of people based on their race >> a way of thinking? everybody thought this way as opposed to um >> but is there a like people will say western thought >> or western thinkers >> and then that impact on the >> kind of the zeitgeist and Overton window is that possibly sort of >> a way of looking at indigenous knowledge is >> well that's what they do they like and Leroy Little Bear just to bring in since he's the man of the hour here >> and he's being celebrated other times a >> yeah Kathy's got it.
>> 4:37.
>> 4:37. So, starting at 5:00, this is when this celebration of Leroy Little Bear's legacy is going to start in Lebridge.
Um, he contrasts indigenous science with western science.
That's the that's the contrast. So indigenous science for example uh accepts spirituality as something that's existing and that can tell us things about the world.
>> Spirituality is unscientific.
>> You can't accept that.
>> Well, I well that is what >> I I accept God. Okay. I guess he's a god.
>> Well, what kind of is that?
That's that's that's why we're on the strongly disagree and the absolute disagree is because we don't think that this that's if you're going to start talking about the supernatural in the context of science, >> you're not talking about science.
>> You're talking about religion.
>> So, uh >> well, I I might just uh say that I'm not so radical, although I I do seem to lean your your I seem to lean that way. For sure.
For sure. But um I think because I'm open to knowledge and you know I may have criticisms of spirituality knowledge itself if we define what we're talking about I think there's a big category error between uh making something exclusive on the basis of who you are.
for example, race or mysticism or grievances versus knowledge as a topic that's open to anybody regardless of what they know about the subject. So if I have a a a knowledge about my own nation, for example, my nation may include all kinds of things like history, um shared language, >> things like that. other people can have knowledge about that without belonging to it and without really exclusive laws and policies about it.
>> So uh so just because I'm just trying to understand your argument here.
>> Oh well >> because I'm open to spirituality nations. I'm open to woo open. Well, I I just think that if the topic is knowledge, because that's it's not we're not talking about Well, we could be. I mean, I'm I'm fine if you want to change it, but if the topic is knowledge, I'm open to the fact that this that these things could have knowledge, but in the way that we're making the category error, um indigenous knowledge, the way it's uh exclusive is not very much knowledge, but it could be.
>> So, what's your definition of knowledge?
Well, it's just that it would have to be not exclusive because that invalidates the quality.
>> Not what it is. What is it that what is model?
>> Okay. Okay. Well, I it's it would be uh good question. I think it would be truth on a subject.
>> Truth on a subject. So, there have to be >> knowledge is what somebody has. Somebody knows that truth. That's not >> justified true belief.
>> Justified true belief.
>> Justified with evidence >> orified has to be functional.
>> Justified covers.
>> Justified is whatever mechanism you have which uh shows you that what you believe to be true is true. So you can have you can believe true things but your belief in true thing like I could have a dream that tomorrow uh I'm going to have a heart attack and I do have a heart attack tomorrow but that me believing that I'm going to have a heart attack tomorrow is not justified because dreams cannot be used as the form of evidence to make that that for me to have that >> and also people can tell you a lie to believe Yeah, but it's true. You can have a true belief that's not knowledge because you haven't justified.
>> You haven't justified. Okay.
>> Um, so that and that was the thing like like you know people and this is what often religion makes this makes use of this because they come up with a like if you look at the Bible there's probably true things that are exist in the Bible but the the Bible is got all sorts of false things in it. So just looking at the Bible as justification for that belief that happens to be true is not a justification.
>> Right? So in Leroy little bear's world uh is it magical thinking that is is indigenous knowledge is that magical thinking? Uh >> um indigenous knowledge is whatever often becomes whatever an indigenous person believes to be true.
>> Yeah. And this is you're seeing this and this has got huge consequences with respect to the residential schools.
So because the knowledge keepers believe that the remains of 215 children um are buried in the CL residential school that is true that is knowledge and and I heard like in University of Manitoba there was a very nice young Aboriginal man who I was talking to and I said why do you believe that that's the case about the remains and he said because the knowledge keepers have said this and everything that the knowledge keeper says they don't lie and they tell the truth, >> you write him off.
>> And so I said, well, what happens if the knowledge keepers disagree? Like what if what happens if one knowledge keeper says that there are remains and the another knowledge keeper says there aren't, >> right?
>> What are you going to do about that? And he kind of was, you know, sort of kind of thinking that over, you know, but that's kind of something that we haven't really done yet. Like so he was on he was over there on the I guess he was on the absolutely agree about the remains question. Um, and when I said to him, "What about different knowledge keepers?
One thinks that there's remains and the other one doesn't. What do you do?" And he was kind of he was kind of thinking and and and he might have moved a little bit like he might have become a little bit less certain >> about that claim now when I was kind of raising that objective. So that's kind of another aspect of spectrum street epistemology that we need to get into which is um Albert is on the absolutely disagree mat about indigenous knowledge being valid.
>> Yeah absolutely.
>> So what evidence would can make you a little bit less certain about that?
>> Well evidence that they had actually had knowledge >> and it was rooted in their indigenity >> because it's indigenous >> rooted in indigenity. it wouldn't be knowledge. Knowledge is an absolute for everyone. You can only you can only have knowledge of things that are true. You can't have knowledge of things that you think or things you believe in like God or something like that. You can't that you can't claim that. There's absolutely no evidence of it. So it can't so it can't be proven true.
>> But let's say that there if if there were evidence if evidence were provided to you >> then I would believe it believe it. So you would you would move like if if I said there's something in the genes of indigenous people that makes it so that they can understand things that non now I have to agree with that >> like like if I if I were able to present you with evidence >> with evidence of that I'd have to agree with it. Okay.
>> I can't disagree with evidence.
>> Yeah. So the evidence >> but that's not true.
>> Yeah. Well that's it's like I don't see how >> I can run a four-minute mark. I don't see you have a you know how you would have evidence of that but I'm just kind of >> but that's kind of the key thing about the indigenous knowledge kind of thing is that it's basically saying that Aboriginal people have understandings of things that are not accessible to non-abboriginal >> that means that okay the fundamental principle in the study of philosophy is truth cannot contradict truth >> and that's contradicting truth >> now I want to I want to propose a new claim I want to propose Clean.
>> Yeah. Water over.
>> Okay. I can run it in 6 minutes.
>> And this has to do. You have to come to the neutral.
>> You start You start on the neutral and then you move.
>> So this was the claim that Leroy Little Bear and the students who were trying to neutralize me took issue with. That's what we were trying to discuss on uh February 4th. And the claim was that the residential schools were genocidal. That was the claim.
>> So where does everyone sit on the residential schools being genocidal?
>> Well, first of all, you have to clarify what you mean by genocidal >> and whether or not that was conscious or or uh yeah, you have to say what you mean by genocidal. So the um in the UN definition, it is the intent to destroy an ethnic group.
>> Yeah, >> that is that's the definition of genocide.
>> And if that were the case, I'd be on the strongly uh I'd be on the strongly disagree.
>> Well, I like the board definition of destroying an ethnic group. You want to go in there and kill them?
>> The intent shoot.
>> There's five there's five criteria in the UN definition. Yeah.
>> Um, uh, kill, so killing, >> not in favor of that.
>> Population transfer, so like taking >> children from one group and >> Oh, yeah. Not in favor of that.
>> Um, sterilization >> is another >> another aspect.
>> Um, uh, harming to the point of, you know, destruction. So, not not necessarily killing, but, you know, >> yeah, >> uh, whatever damage. Um, so those that's the definition. So >> there's one more, isn't it?
>> There is one more, but I can't remember.
Um, but I disagree that that's what the residential schools were doing.
>> So the residential schools in my view are not genocidal because they were not trying to destroy the Aboriginal population. They were trying to assimilate the Aboriginal population because it was believed that the way of life of Aboriginal people was not developed to the extent that it would allow Aboriginal children to be able to thrive in a modern society which had much more developed economics and economic processes, scientific or processes of um understanding the world and political processes. So in order to give Aboriginal children the skills and the values and the attitudes that they would need to be able to become self-reliant in the developing Canadian economy and society, they would need to be going to boarding schools.
>> Okay.
>> So that that's the basis of um transferring from tribalism to civilization.
So um so where do you where do you sit on this question Albert?
>> What's the question >> is or the claim? The residential schools were genocidal.
>> No >> that depends on what you mean by genocidal.
>> Well I just said the definition intended.
>> Okay then I I agree you agree >> or strongly disagree.
>> I absolutely disagree.
The purpose of the residential schools was to civilize uh tribal societies.
>> Yeah.
>> Is isn't that destroying tribal society?
>> Uh well destroy >> in >> I don't mean in violence or anything. I mean there no longer be tribal society.
Now there will be civilization.
>> Yeah. But in terms of the people like like like you might >> Well, you can't impose it on them. Of course not. Well, you know what we do?
We send Aboriginal kids to school. I remember I taught them.
>> They're not the same when they do that.
>> Yeah. But but not being the same anymore is not destroying something.
>> Well, it it's destroying what was there before if that's no longer there.
>> But it's like that would be like anyone who goes to school is destroyed because they're learning things that they didn't.
>> Everybody who learns to read is destroying >> destroying their their literatur. So, you know, I don't think that's what the UN the UN is trying to talk about. the problem of saying what you mean by what the context of the word destroying is.
It's a very broad >> definition which is what we're generally using is they're trying to say this is the biggest crime that a state can commit.
>> It's like the Holocaust and the genocide of the the Jewish population during the Holocaust. And so therefore to say that the residential schools were genocidal is to say it's kind of got some degree of equivalence with the Holocaust and what the >> Yeah, that's people who want to make that argument. But what do they do about the fact that we're getting rid of illiteracy?
>> Well, that's a different subject.
>> Yeah, but that's but that's that's not what they >> different subject, but it's the same verb.
>> But the UN the UN definition is not about getting rid of the the UN believes that getting rid of illiteracy is a beneficial thing. It's not a genocidal.
Yes, it is because it's progressive.
>> Yeah.
>> So, in terms of the UN conception of genocide, >> are the residential schools genocide >> in terms of the UN definition?
>> Well, I don't accept the UN definition if that's what it's got to be.
>> Okay.
>> You know, genocide means killing a whole generation of people.
>> That's not what it's doing. It's a metaphor to use that term >> and then apply it to to to this. We should do some say something that is more descriptive.
>> Well, you know, I I'm only I'm not on the same mat as Francis because I'm willing to wait until evidence like actual forensic evidence is obtained.
So, I think that even though I may be 95% sure based on what I know already by investigating, you know, I've read a lot. I kind of am waiting. I think that there's a lot that could be done if the Canadian state or leadership in Canada wanted to resolve the question. So in that case, if we did discover evidence, I might >> Yeah. But that's that's why you you you go on the mat of which you think the evidence that you have now is going to place you on.
>> Oh, yes.
>> And then you say yes. If like if you were to become like for example >> I'm on the strongly disagree Matt with respect to this claim about the residential schools being genocidal >> and if I was was if if it could be shown to me that Johnny A McDonald's campaign on the prairies was to uh intentionally starve the Aboriginal population then I would move I would move over to the slightly agreed matter maybe even the agree because Johnny McDonald was the prime minister of Canada. He was acting on behalf of the Canadian state and his intentional starvation of the population would move me closer to accepting that the residential schools were genocide.
And same with all the other claims. If I was to find out whether there was an intentional attempt to stere sterilize indigenous women, for example, that would move me more in this direction.
Now, in terms of going over to the far kinds of areas, that would have to be just a widespread kind of policy. Um, you know, there there because I know that Johnny McDonald had claims where he he he he wanted Aboriginal people to have the right to vote, for example, and he wanted all other things. So it it's a bit of a mixed kind of um um type of history for him. So that's the kind of thing. But but the more evidence that would be provided to show me that Canada had met these five criteria that the UN has set out in its genocide uh definition, the closer I would move over to the strongly kind of agree side of side of that spectrum. Are there any other strong arguments for the residential schools being genocidal >> uh with the definition of genocide? Uh the cultural genocide argument. So >> um so going back to the neutral Matt because this is what we do in Spectre Street epistmology as well is you sometimes try to clarify definitions. So cultural genoc this is the claim cultural genocide is genocide.
I strongly disagree that the cultural genocide >> is genocide.
>> Well, it's obvious if you're if you're using an adjective for genocide.
>> We can't change that.
>> You just called it genocide. So, how am I going to say it's not genocide?
>> Well, I just I'm disagreeing with it.
>> Mhm.
>> So, I'm strongly disagreeing with the claim that cultural genocide is genocide.
>> Some people argue >> depends on our definition of >> Some people argue that um that cultural genocide is genocide.
>> How are you doing?
>> Because um >> they think that destroying like the culture, Aboriginal culture is so much a part of who Aboriginal people are. This is kind of like the argument you're talking about is that >> like Aboriginal people had a preiterate culture >> that's tribal culture >> and therefore um >> if you teach civilization if you go through a civilization process you've destroyed their tribal culture and therefore that would be like the evidence for the strongly agree >> Francis just to that term so what you've done is you've overcome tribal culture We can't see progress as always destroying something.
>> Well, well, actually, that's part of what I might um expand the question, Francis, because culture, genocide, and having rights are all kind of confabulated. But >> do you think that prior to residential schools, residential school period or post indigenization that indigenous people have more civil liberty or less civil liberty?
>> Do you think >> in sorry in what in in the difference between what and what?
>> Well, because genocide implies a violation of rights. So let's say >> I don't want to use a false conception of rights.
>> [snorts] >> But let's say civil liberties like modern good the good kind of rights.
>> Do you think that indigenous people have less actual rights today under the new system of um say indigenization >> did since what? Since compared to what?
Sorry, I don't understand.
>> Okay. Well, uh let's say prior to the uh changing of the constitution and the and the slow creation of the self-governance sort of structures that we see today. So self-government aboriginal treaty rights um actually deprivives on the ground. So it's kind of this interesting distinction between dure and de facto. So dure they have more rights because they have rights that all Canadians have in and in addition to that they have Aboriginal and treaty rights but de facto they have fewer rights. Because what Aboriginal self-government does is it um puts Aboriginal people, marginalized Aboriginal people under the control of tribal dictators.
>> So they live in a tribal dictatorship where >> their basic rights uh equality under the law, rights to freedom of speech and freedom of association and so on are strongly diminished.
>> Wow. That's the situation that that exists in average on demand.
>> Wow. Well, I I I would say, you know, I don't know many people in Canada who who understand that, but but I think I agree with that.
>> Yeah, >> for sure. For sure.
>> Do you guys have a have any >> So, what how are we doing for time?
>> I don't know.
>> Doing good.
>> There's 116 people watching.
>> Hey, that's great.
>> Wow. Hello everyone.
>> It's been 1 hour. 1 hour.
>> What is the actual time though?
>> Oh, the actual time 4:59.
>> 459 going up to 5:00. [laughter] >> Oh. Oh, Le Bridge, you guys.
>> Now in >> Yep.
>> excite Lebridge.
We are having a celebration of uh Leroy Little Bear's legacy.
And uh you'll notice on this poster that it has Leroy Little Bear's famous quote that uh the students acting in this unbelievably um harassing and intimidating and abusive and damaging of property and so on.
He said that that was uh the students did a fantastic job in well he was talking about neutralizing her so he was talking about me and then on I believe it was February 13th the president of the University of Lebridge and Leroy Little Bear held a sweet grass ceremony where they smudged the atrium to rid the atrium of the negative negative energy that they claimed that I had brought to the University of Blath Brbridge on February 4th, 2020.
>> This situation to the Alberta government, if the Alberta government is listening, this is a university that has completely lost its way. It has allowed people like Leroy Little Bear, who is an activist, an activist with a law degree, not an academic, to seize control over that institution and to use it as a propaganda outlet for these Aboriginal groups in southern Alberta. This university must be put back on its academic course. And the way that it's going to be put back on its academic course is to hold an actual event to discuss that question about whether the residential schools are genocidal with the different positions that exist on the question so that we can talk to one another, present the evidence that each person has to be able to discuss this.
And that event must be held at the University of Lethbridge with Anthony Hall who was defamed, terribly defamed.
Myself, I was defamed. Aaron Pete, who is the chief of the Hope band, who is a a light of rationality in a very, very irrational circumstance. And anyone that the University of Lethbridge or the University of Lethbridge faculty association would like to have representing their position. So we can have a better understanding of this question and stop these deranged students who are being used as a weapon by people like Leroy Little Bear and the president of the University of Lethbridge from allowing them to be able to control what is said um on the campus of this what used to be an academic institution but is no longer academic. It is completely activistoriented.
Well, it so that the event in Lethbridge celebrating Leroy Little Bear that is taking place tonight should be beginning, you know, any time now.
>> 503.
[laughter] >> So, so maybe some of them are watching.
I think that'd be fun. But uh but it seems like after so many um major court battles, so many major major scandals, it seems like every time anyone engages with the institution in any serious way, there's a new scandal cuz it's just perpetual. So >> well, they're they're getting worse because they're having to actually reinforce their irrationality.
So instead of dealing with the the terrible situation that exists at the University of Lethbridge and admitting that that was just completely unacceptable what happened on February 1st, 2023 which was the first meltdown where um a talk which uh Paulinets had invited me to give was cancelled. We're waiting on a court case about that. We went to court in uh April 2026 and we're going to find out whether that is going to be uh an event that's going to be ordered to take place. And then because they were able to have that happen and no one fought back against that, they acted in a more even more extreme fashion in February 4th, 2026.
And then when I just went down there in fe uh April to have a coffee with a student in a in the auditorium, >> that resulted in me being issued a trespass order and being hauled away in handcuffs.
>> Mhm.
>> Because this university cannot allow people to make arguments with which the indigenization activists disagree. So by celebrating Leroy Little Bear, you're celebrating the destruction of academia or an academic institution.
>> That's correct.
>> And that's where we're we are at right now, >> the University of Lethbridge.
>> And because the University of Lethbridge is so bad, >> it's actually probably good because it will show people that this cannot continue >> in academic institutions. You cannot stop academic discussions from taking place at an academic institution.
>> And if you stop that from taking place, you are no longer an academic institution. You are an activist uh university which is just promoting um the views of various you know the powerful factions on campus and silencing anyone who wants to put forward um a viewpoint that's contrary to that and the university will not be able to continue to access. Francis, uh, they they misspelled your name when the emails had leaked about a person alert and it was uh they were very worried about the security and safety and health of students on campus when the email of a person alert went out and they misspelled your name that you were somehow a threat because you wanted to have coffee with a student. Do you want to Is that normal? ation which is uh celebrating the uh preiterate cultures of the tribal societies. Spelling doesn't matter anyway basically situation. So we're not going to bother with any of the rigorous kind of disciplinary characteristics. We can have Leroy Little Bear pontificating about how spiritualism is an aspect of science and no one says anything about it and everyone just is saying how wonderful he is and how he understands things so well to him >> and uh that is nonsense and uh you know Leroy Little Bear should not be in charge of this academic institution >> because he is just an activist and that is not what is required and so we need to have the University of Lethbridge, you know, we need to take stock of what's happened, we need to admit that this is totally unacceptable.
And I'm hoping with the court decision that's going to be coming out in a couple months, the defamation lawsuit against the University of Lethbridge Faculty Association for defaming me and Tony Hull, and for the cultural kinds of changes that are needed that we will soon see the University of Lethbridge >> become an academic space once more.
Leroy Little Bear has said some pretty wild stuff. Yeah.
>> That I wouldn't consider academic, but he's being um applauded.
>> Yeah.
>> In with with uh very high honor.
>> Mhm.
>> And celebrated.
>> Yeah.
>> And in your opinion, what was one of the one of the strangest things he said out of all of those? Um well the strangest thing he said is that the the Blackfoot which is a a preiterate and pre-numerate culture because it didn't have discrete numbers for let's say 12 or uh so on that because of the verb-based character of the the Blackfoot language the Blackfoot do not need mathematics to be able to understand quantum physics.
And that should just be laughed at because quantum mechanics came out of a huge history in physics >> starting off with the Greeks >> going forward to Galileo going forward to Newton >> and then Einstein. Einstein had a incredible knowledge of mathematics >> and that's what allowed Einstein to develop these theories and all the other people who are draw who are doing quantum mechanics.
>> So to suggest that you can develop an understanding of quantum mechanics without mathematics is absurd and should not uh be entertained. Well, you can entertain it but you shouldn't feel coerced into accepting it. and and that actually you know not many people in Canada may be aware but in the last two or so years and of course it was in development since 2019 or even a little before that there's there are requisites for many programs on campuses around Canada where you do have to go through these you know cultural competency >> activities and programs >> like at MRU we've investigated >> y So >> yeah, >> I just wanted to see like although the non-abboriginal students are probably a little bit annoyed at all these things being imposed upon them, >> which I totally I I I stand with them, they shouldn't have to waste their time with all this this this nonsense which is not improving their education.
The biggest the the the the people who are the most victimized by this are the Aboriginal students >> because that was the whole purpose of the University of Lethbridge was to allow people from rural communities and people from the reserves to be able to to come and to learn more about the world and to to obviously to get a a university education.
>> Wow. But what's happening is with indigenous studies is that it's being used as a way of lowering the standards for Aboriginal students.
>> So the Aboriginal students are being deprived of receiving the education that all people in Canada deserve and they're not getting that. So it's being used to justify in fact the lower standards of of education that Aboriginal students are receiving and that should be unacceptable. Aboriginal people deserve the same educational um kinds of opportunities as everyone else does. But because of the um equity, diversity, and inclusion logic where, you know, you have to kind of accept this this kind of uh indigenous ways of knowing >> um we're not we're not able to to to uh develop and understand.
>> Thank you.
>> This is JJ.
>> Oh. [laughter] >> Oh, that's sweet.
>> For a good long time. See you JD.
>> That that phenomenon has occurred to black people too.
>> Yeah.
>> So they wanted to adjust the levels in schools. So they lowered the standards.
>> Yeah.
>> And when end the people with the lower standards ended up being black.
>> Yeah.
>> And uh so it looked like black students were dumb.
>> Yeah. So equity, diversity, inclusion, that ideology says that it's should be proportionality in the professional managerial class. Hm.
>> So if you have 7% of Aboriginal people in the population, 7% of the professors should be Aboriginal, 7% of the administrators should be Aboriginal, 7% of people on boards of bank should be Aboriginal. And if you don't have 7% Aboriginal uh representation, it's because your standards are exclusionary and you've got to rejig the standards to increase the numbers of Aboriginal professors and students at the university. And that's what this Aboriginal ways of knowing and indigenous science and all this stuff's all about is that you pretend like instead of encouraging Aboriginal people to become actual physicists, you say that just reading Leroy Little Bear and spouting off this nonsense about the verb- based languages and so on that now they are actually physicists and they should have some kind of representation in various kinds of of you know professorship positions in the universe.
>> This creeps into medicine, too.
>> Yeah, it does. It's terrible.
>> That's where it's really dangerous.
>> Yeah, it's very dangerous.
>> So, is there uh when you're destroying the neutrality of a university and thus its academic mission?
>> Yeah. Is it more dangerous if that destruction is um of a religious nature as opposed to just is it if let's say uh the university took a position on uh the war in Israel? Would that be more dangerous than if they take a position of religiosity like bringing in sacred symbols and sacred objects and doing prayers in school? Is there something that's >> I think it's particularly problematic the spiritualism that's being promoted because it goes to the heart of the reasoning process.
>> So rejected.
>> So accepting these kinds of ideas that um you know dreams so that that dreams are a form of evidence that kind of idea. If we're going to accept that that that you can have a some crazy dreams and now you're going to be going and acting upon those that quote unquote evidence >> which is very damaging instead of saying just because something turns out to be true that you dreamt the night before that doesn't mean that your dream was some kind of justification for that for that uh that belief that you were that came true Right.
>> Yeah. I've had Christians tell me that uh they could speak to the Holy Spirit and I couldn't imagine, you know, anyone taking that seriously in an academic institution. You know, how did you get this answer?
>> Um but yet we do that because of the political situation with the indigenous people and kind of the framing and the narrative. Yeah, it's quentric.
>> And I think uh Thomas Hobbes, the great political philosopher, might have said it best when he said um to say that God came to you in a dream is to say that you dreamt that you saw God.
>> And that's what you're talking about here >> is that like I could have a dream, you know, where I, you know, have some kind of conversation with whomever. George Orwell came to me a dream. whatever. Um, but that doesn't mean that I was actually having some conversation with the the ghost of George Orwell, >> these kinds of things. So, I think that this the spiritualism is a particular damaging kind of uh thing for the universities to become involved in because >> it goes to the heart of the scientific enterprise which is trying to figure out the patterns of matter. Like that's that's what we're trying to do in science is that cause and effects relationships and if we're going to go into the supernatural then anything is possible >> because you don't have the you know the laws of the universe no longer apply.
>> You can't go into the supernatural because there's no evidence for >> no but people >> can't proceed without evidence.
>> They can justify any belief. they can say that, you know, we need to burn Francis at the stake. We probably had a dream about it. Right.
>> Well, here's another question is um you know, I know the author and novelist Lionel uh Shiver, you know, she's outspoken on gender ideology as a an example, but she's recently said uh you know how and I believe Jordan Peterson may have said the same thing is that all this uh woke kind of policy and ideology and and you know obstruction ruction.
It's really in the way of us studying real subjects. We like it's would it be nice to move move forward?
>> That's right. So, we are we're in a sto we're in a holding pattern now.
>> This is postmodernism.
>> Yeah. We're battling out like basic things that we we really >> we really shouldn't have to do it. But it's it's important to do it because it shows that we've got kind of flaws in our reasoning processes and our social kinds of uh organization. So it's a battle that needs to be fought. But I can see why people are frustrated with it because it it prevents us from looking at you know moving forward in terms of having better understanding.
We've got to sort out these roadblocks which have really been building up since the 60s >> with as as Albert saying postmodernism which was the relativist position that uh there's no such thing as an objective truth. There's the truth of different cultures.
And then we got, you know, the the the truth of oppressed cultures are very important to affirm because this will allow oppressed groups to be able to empower themselves and, you know, assert their position in in, you know, political interactions. But of course, you know, the oppressed need the truth just as much, if not more than those that are powerful members of society because that gives them a an accurate understanding of of of what's what's happening and how they can actually >> work to improve their circumstances. So, I think that was a real flawed argument that was allowed to take root in following the 60s and we've just been having this ridiculous kinds of uh these ridiculous things kind of take hold of the universities and no better example of that is the University of Lbridge and Leroy Little Bear. The fact that this guy is being taken seriously in a university just shows you how far we've fallen in terms of our ability to have academic institutions and you know evaluate claims like be able to rationally evaluate claims. We're not able to do that anymore because people are saying if you criticize Leroy Little Bear and his ideas, you are criticizing Aboriginal people >> and they're uh and they're you're you're putting them down and you're and you're not allowing them to, you know, take their rightful place. Well, the way that Aboriginal people are going to be able to become full participants in Canadian society is when they have a good understanding of science. They understand the historical development of humanity.
not dwelling on, you know, obscure things to do with different tribal groupings. Like we're talking about the history of humanity here >> and we should be able to understand that >> and we should have like a we should be well grounded >> in uh you know understanding material processes which is is like all the spiritualism is just um irrational and and really is a an obstacle.
>> So in order for something to be scientific it has to be falsifiable.
Yeah.
>> And that's very important to understand.
>> And so if you're not allowed to question someone or their ideas.
>> Yeah.
>> That's right.
>> Then the information is no longer falsifiable.
>> Yeah. A lot of cults are like that.
>> Yeah.
>> You do not contradict your father.
>> You're full of But you can't say it. you know, and and traditional societies, that's the way it is, is that the uh tribal chieftains, the you know, the elders, you're supposed to not question them. That's disrespectful, >> but that's what we've got in terms of what's going on at the University of Leage.
>> So, >> and Mount Royal.
>> Well, Mount Royal is is uh is also in serious trouble, >> but but they haven't gone so far as the University of Lethbridge. Like the thing about the University of Lethbridge is this.
Um when you have administration and the faculty association openly, you know, kind of affirming the violent behavior of a mob.
That is I've never seen that before >> uh at a university. That's why I think it's so bad. Like I think there's a lot of problems with Mount Royal University, a lot of problems with University of British Columbia and so on. Like I, as I said, I've got a university's hall of shame which has about 10 universities that have behaved absolutely terribly.
>> Mhm.
>> But no one has behaved in the outrageous fashion that the University of Lethbridge has. I guess the one exception is the University of Winnipeg >> where the University of Winnipeg faculty association did, but they didn't come out as stridently as we saw at the University of Lebridge.
>> So they're second. they're second in terms of their um kind of disgraceful conduct. But we we really need to put the University of Leth back on an academic path because it's obvious that the university is failing >> in a massive way. And if we're not going to correct the university that has shown itself to be failing in the most disastrous way, it means that we're not going to be able to correct any of the institutions.
>> That they're basically doomed. That we've lost our universities and we're not going to be able to have universities where people can go and figure out things and be able to disseminate justified true beliefs to the next generation and to the public.
That's not going to exist anymore. Well, Francis, I have a maybe a >> a final sort of um reminiscing of uh observing, you know, ritualized activities. You know, they they may have been sort of somewhat funny to us, but they were actually serious for the institution and the requisites >> and they you know, a lot of the students spinning in circles and listening to things that they >> they don't understand the language. They don't understand what they're being they're spinning in circles, too.
They're doing they're being made to do things that they don't really uh know what they're doing or why they're doing it. And they're not, you know, it's it's not that they're being distracted, but they're being mandated to do that.
>> And it's really that that human spiderwe uh what we're talking about is the human spiderweb. So, and this is the connection between Leroy Little Bear and uh Mount Royal University. So Leroy Little Bear has ridiculous things that he says such as this uh that everything is related is like a spiderweb and uh that this got taken by Roy Beare Chief who's the elder at the uh elder in residence at Mount Royal University to develop his creation story that he got from his brother called the human spider web >> Annie Topci. Annie Tesci and they get these students to put on orange shirts and dance around on this spider web that's drawn out on a field.
This is complete infantilization of the student body. H >> this is something that 5-year-olds might be doing and you probably wouldn't even want your 5-year-old to be doing it because it would be so nonsensical >> that he wouldn't be teaching them anything or providing them with anything >> objection to that.
>> Uh no. So, um I was in the classroom where uh Roy Bear Chief came in with Steven Price >> and it was a big um big room, one of their larger uh lecture uh rooms and Roy Bear Chief put up a a video. He he talked. You could barely hear what he was saying. It was um sort of mumbling, incoherent. It was like, you know, um I didn't know if I was in a university or the or you know, the old folks were psych. I didn't know what was happening.
Um and the video, what I felt was really concerning is not just the infantilization, but that it felt like I was in a cult >> where there was um very dramatic sort of spa music playing and emotion. I was being I was we were all being emotionally manipulated >> uh and then uh recruited >> to join in this event and um I don't remember if I openly um dissented >> well Kathy there there's um a big big question in Canada right now and it's not only just you know if if these things are coercive or if they're not working. I think most Canadians who are reasonable would maybe say they're not working. But what is the value proposition of an education? Cuz you were if you're paying tuition, for example, >> you know, what do the students expect to get back from from their tuition?
>> They uh just want accreditation.
>> Everyone just wants to get through and you just want Yeah. You just want to say I here's this piece of paper. It has my name on it. Um, but there's no value >> in this sort of >> and and just to bring back again to the spiderweb thing and Albert said, "Did anyone oppose it?" Yes, they did. In 2019, I saw the first mentioning of this spiderweb stuff and I I uh made fun of it on social media uh because it had a Leroy Little Bear quote about the animate which was everything is animate and if it everything is animate um everything has spirit. it. And if everything has spirit, everything has knowledge.
>> If you accept that everything is animate in the first place, >> well, it doesn't even flow that like >> that bench.
>> Anyway, this was used as a quote to justify the spiderweb nonsense that's going on.
>> Anyway, I could not believe that this was being promoted by Steven Price, who was the dean of health and community studies, >> health and physical education.
>> Health and physical education.
And I thought, how is this going to help us to understand anything to do with what is being claimed in this announcement that was put out? And that was that was must have been 2020 because it was it was after George Floyd, the whole George Floyd situation and um the killing of George Floyd and um >> the fact that uh systemic racism was now seen as a big problem. And the claim was is that this spiderweb idea was going to help us to understand systemic racism.
>> And I said something like, >> "How is this going to help us to understand systemic racism in this character? Is this got something to do with the spiderweb vibrations or something like that?" That's kind of the mild >> um kind of mocking that I did. Because of doing that, I was uh made uh Gabriel Weasel Head very very upset because she felt that I was not uh supporting indigenous ways of knowing and whatnot. And Greg Beerie, although people think that he was a harmless guy and he's just like an innocent elder, >> he was part of an email list in 2021 which was saying that my arguments should not be protected by tenure. There was about 14 professors and administrators on this email list and that's what these 14 people were talking about behind my back >> in 20121.
>> So Mount Royal University although you're not as bad as the University of Lor, you are pretty bad >> and you've got to be, you know, we've got to start taking charge of the academic character of that university too. But hopefully that's going to all be sorted out through the uh the uh the constant kind of battle that's happening around my reinstatement because I must be reinstated at Mount Royal University.
If I can't be reinstated about Mount Royal University, it's going to mean that a bunch of activists at that university are allowed to basically purge a professor who has agreements with which they disagree. And that precedent cannot stand at university.
>> Yeah. While the that one event makes Lethbridge worse, the environment at Mount Royal having all these religious artifacts >> um is very imposing. Kind of creates this chilling effect. They have a giant buffalo skin.
>> They have religious ceremonies to bless the paint.
>> Buffalo skin are religious.
>> I thought that was just culture.
>> Well, if they if they are blessing it with ceremonies from blessing, >> it becomes I >> And then [laughter] and then the knowledge bundle. Don't forget the know or the bundle.
>> Yes.
>> The bundle that's behind.
>> Remember the thing I just put the bundle.
>> Yes. The bundle behind a glass case saying you can't speak in front of the bundle because it's like a child. It's got to be protected.
>> Be quiet around the bundle. We had the uh Linda Many Guns's decolonized mind campaign where if you didn't accept that Christopher Columbus encountered indigenous people in Ireland before he sailed to the Americas, you have a colonized mind and >> giant billboards. Giant billboards all over the school.
>> I guess they bigger than the the bench.
um would say if you don't believe that uh >> oh yeah >> oral tradition is a valid form of evidence that >> you have a you have a colonized mind.
>> It was Lyn Man who was the uh >> So does anybody is anybody able to put that up or >> No, it's just the administration.
>> Okay. But the administration decides >> so it's their point of view.
>> Yes. H >> and there's TVs every focus on the world unite I guess won't be the one.
>> Yeah. Well, we have uh the Chicago principles which the uh the government of Alberta mandated in 2019 and it is that the university it's not up to the university to tell people what to think. The university creates an environment where people come together and examine the evidence >> and you follow the evidence wherever it leads. So that's a complete violation.
And the University of Lethbridgeidge argued in the court and case in April that their free speech policy did not mandate institutional neutrality.
And Glenn Blacket, the lawyer for the justice center, said, "Wait a minute here. In this policy, it said it is not up the to the university to determine, you know, how people should come to their conclusions. it is up to them to provide the environment whereby people can decide for themselves once presented for the evidence.
>> So that was again a misleading argument that was put forward by University of Gladbridge. So we need to have open inquiry, critical thinking.
We need to be able to follow the evidence wherever it leads. That because of the way in which these university administrations are acting and the way that they are backed up by these horrible faculty associations that are completely captured by equity and diversity inclusion ideology, it means that you cannot have any check on this totalitarianism that is taking root in our universities today.
Well, Francis, you got 146 people watching.
>> Okay.
>> And for those who may have joined a little bit late, you're holding a sign here. Do do you want to maybe uh kind of for those who join Oh, 148 people are are joined now watching. So, do you want to maybe go over a little bit about what's happening tonight and why we got this um little blue uh >> I just wanted to let people know >> Oh. that a spider >> Yes, I saw >> has just come on.
>> Look at that.
>> The spider has just come onto the uh the billboard.
>> Maybe it's an in maybe it's the great spirit. And so the spider for people who don't know the joke about this is that uh the Aboriginal uh neotribal elites are uh having the analogy of the spiderweb that the spiderweb is when you hear you have a vibration on part of the web the creator comes and helps and uh stops the vibrations >> restores balance. But of course what I've said is that the vibrations on a spiderwe come from a fly or a insect and the spider when he feels the vibrations on the spider web doesn't is not going over to help the entity that's been entangled in the web the spider is going over there to uh you know and and and eat the the whatever it is. So this is a nonsensical kind of metaphor that is being put forward by Leroy Little Bear and and Roy Bear Chief etc etc. >> So these are two separate people but they both have a bear in their name.
>> That's correct.
>> Just a coincidence or >> coincidence I think >> but who knows? Um >> we should invite Leroy Little Bear into the enlightenment.
>> Yes. Leroy Little Bear is opposed to the Enlightenment. He says that reason that's what where we went wrong with reason and we have too much reason. We need to bring back spiritualism and stuff. Um, anyway, Leroy Little Bear, this is why we're here is that Morgan and I were going to be going down to Lethbridge to hold this billboard up in front of Excite Lethbridge while everyone came in for this celebration for Leroy Little Bear because we were asking the question, is it really appropriate for the University of Lethbridge to be celebrating the legacy of Leroy Little Bear when Leroy Little Bear is the uh administrator who said that he completely approved of students acting in a deranged fashion and not allowing a discussion, an academic discussion to take place on February 4th, which was on the question of whether or not the residential schools were genocidal. And we need to have these kinds of discussions at universities, but allowing activists like Leroy Little Bear to be in charge is totally preventing universities from being able to do that. So we have to stop celebrating the people who are trying to shut down these discussions and that's what we wanted to draw attention to today in Lethbridge. But because of the health emergency that is taking place at this uh at this hospital we thought we would bring Lethbridge to the hospital >> and then have the discussion here.
>> Yeah. Great weather. We got rained on.
We we got sunlight.
>> A whole bunch of different >> What is his title at the university and has it changed over the years? Yes.
>> So, he was initially the chair of the Native American Studies program. I just had an interview with Tony Hall today and he was part of the group in that department that pushed Tony Hall out of the Department of Native American studies.
Um, and that should never have happened.
I was talking to Tony about this today is that the administration should have said, "No, you can't push a professor out of your department just because you don't like him or like his position."
that he that that was a terrible precedent that was set by the University of Lethbridge and then it just got worse and worse and worse and so then Leroy Little Bear he retired as he was the chair I think for 21 years and then he was given an administrative position and then I don't know in what year he became the vice provost in Iskim indigenous relations that's a and that's a position that he's held for about >> at least it was 2023 he was in that position so I I think it was 2022 that he got that position.
>> And he's being celebrated cuz he's retiring.
>> Yeah.
>> And is anyone take They have their elders in residence. Is that >> No, they've got a replacement for Lero.
>> Oh, okay.
>> Yes.
>> And it is a woman who I believe her last name is Fox. It's a doublebarreled name.
Fox- Bruised Head. That is her name. Um, and she is going to be taking over the helm of the But, uh, Tony says that that that Leroy Little Bear has retired several times. And so, just because he says he's retiring this year doesn't mean he's actually going to be retired.
>> Wow.
>> Whatever.
>> Um, whatever position he takes up, unless it's as uh, you know, I don't know what position he can take up at the university. It's like some kind of you know, stacking the chairs and stuff like that. You know, we need people doing that or whatever. like various custodial kinds of >> if he wants to be a charlatan.
>> He could be a maybe some kind of but I don't even know what his legal background is whether that's at a high level or anything like that. So >> seems as though he should open up some sort of like cult or church where people could go and make donations but not >> that's right. Yeah. He should not be in charge of a university's academic character.
>> That's what's going on.
>> So >> Mhm.
>> Anyway, we're getting on I think to probably around 5:30.
>> Yes.
>> Okay. And Albert Albert is your dinner is probably going to be getting cold there with your uh >> your dinner is probably 5:00.
>> Yeah, we got a >> Yeah. [laughter] >> So, I think we should maybe sign off here. I just wanted to say a few last words.
>> Mhm.
>> We didn't manage to get down to Lethbridge today to uh we're going to do a trying to to smudge the uh irrationality out of the University of Lethbridge.
I was going to meet with Paul and Pam.
Paul Vivvenets from Pamela Lindsay.
Didn't get a chance to do that. I did interview Tony Tony Hall. So that was good. That wasn't all last. And we actually had a bit of an addition because I wasn't actually planning on doing the Spectrum Street epistemology today at Excite Lebridge, but we're able to do some interesting claims that we looked at and so that was kind of a bit of a bonus. Francis, do you think maybe uh you'll get out on the streets more and get more purchas >> so that you can uh >> Well, Peter Begoian is coming on uh August 23rd and August 24th. So, we want to get some practice in before that time. And I suggested this, but and I'm hoping it's going to happen. We're going to be going into Mount Royal University on either the 23rd or the 24th to discuss some claims at that university.
So that's going to be a very very interesting exercise doing the Spectrum Street Epistemology at Mount Royal University with the great Peter Pojian and Read Nice Wonder. That's that's the dream. That's the dream.
>> Everyone, we we got 157 uh who are signed on and and watching uh Francis and we're going to sign off now. So, thank you so much.
>> Thank you so much for joining us. Got to get Albert to have his dinner at the Rocky View Hospital. Thanks a lot.
Related Videos
Communist manifesto was written by Marks and ?
ApnaHistoryOfficial
1K views•2026-06-16
Churches Were Preaching To Make Money | Michael Jones Inspiring Philosophy Speakers corner
LilLaaHilHamd
140 views•2026-06-14
Mandukya Upanishad | Day 52 | Swami Nikhilananda Saraswati
swami.nikhilananda.saraswati
119 views•2026-06-17
The Moral Ethics of Hamsterdam - The Wire
TheShowiest
1K views•2026-06-19
Discovering Better Logics in a Binary World | Dr. Tamice Spencer-Helms | TNE Podcasts
thenewevangelicalspodcast
148 views•2026-06-15
The Person You Protect Does Not Exist
TheChopraWell
1K views•2026-06-16
The Most Honest Lucid Dreaming Video I've Ever Made
luciddreamingteacher
153 views•2026-06-20
June 16, 2026
nickcbarr
1K views•2026-06-16
