4 ms·

I'm not sure a ban on irrationality is exactly what you want. Even psychosis can be a very creative and valuable moment of insight or growth, and people incline

by theoh 10y ago

I'm not sure a ban on irrationality is exactly what you want. Even psychosis can be a very creative and valuable moment of insight or growth, and people inclined to (admittedly unreliable) irrational thought need to be supported by others rather than shunned. See also this recent article: http://arstechnica.co.uk/science/2016/11/election-ourage-moral-rationality-study/ http://arstechnica.co.uk/science/2016/11/election-ourage-mor... Also, HN in particular can have a kneejerk objectivist flavour that discourages intuitive, unconventional discussion. Dismissing people who seem irrational is not a good way to encourage healthy cognitive diversity, and we could do with less of it.

duncancarroll 10y ago
Sure; I think you may have read my comment wrong, I'm talking about people who, for example, think they're channelling the Archangel Gabriel or that they can materialize objects into existence, or make other totally unfounded claims. The point I was making was that those people do a disservice to open discussion because nobody wants to be painted with that brush, so it ends up becoming an HN-type situation where, as you rightly pointed out, there is a resistance to new ideas. There's probably a formal-discourse type term for it.