3 ms·

> Before I feel comfortable asserting a dissenting opinion in a public forum, I would much rather discuss the subject among my peers where I don't feel I will b

> Before I feel comfortable asserting a dissenting opinion in a public forum, I would much rather discuss the subject among my peers where I don't feel I will be immediately eviscerated for a poorly constructed thought. While I certainly emphasize with the anxiety of publicly expressing an unpopular opinion, I believe it is, especially in times like these, your moral duty to endure in spite of the repercussions and speak your mind. Even though I went to Stanford and had direct access to Milgrom's famous prison experiment, the lesson from it didnt hit home until many years later I read this article: https://aeon.co/ideas/the-desire-to-fit-in-is-the-root-of-almost-all-wrongdoing https://aeon.co/ideas/the-desire-to-fit-in-is-the-root-of-al... Now, the phrase "All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to remain silent" resonates with me.

groby_b 10y ago
This phrase does not mean "All good men should continually natter on". It is also your moral duty to present a cogent argument, lest we drown in a sea of mostly inane babbling and constant infighting, completely burying the points that need to be made. Speaking out matters. So does when, where, and how you speak out. And that is something best discussed privately. I'd have much more to say on how privacy and anonymity are inextricably linked, but I'll let the EFF say it: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/01/right-anonymity-matter-privacy https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/01/right-anonymity-matter...
- FullMtlAlcoholc 10y ago
  It's not a moral duty, it's a Robb Report level luxury. One does not need to be particularly articulate or present a rational argument, especially when dealing with matters of morality. Sadly, rhetoric and appeals to emotion, empathy, and common sense are more effective if your goal is to sway others. > This phrase does not mean "All good men should continually natter on". It is also your moral duty to present a cogent argument What I was trying to say is there will be times where you are not as prepared as you like. It's not about presenting an airtight, cogent argument, it's about having the courage to say something like, "Officer, stop beating the shit out of this guy in a wheelchair. He's clearly isn't resisting and you're being a dick."

groby_b 10y ago

This phrase does not mean "All good men should continually natter on". It is also your moral duty to present a cogent argument, lest we drown in a sea of mostly inane babbling and constant infighting, completely burying the points that need to be made. Speaking out matters. So does when, where, and how you speak out. And that is something best discussed privately. I'd have much more to say on how privacy and anonymity are inextricably linked, but I'll let the EFF say it: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/01/right-anonymity-matter-privacy https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2012/01/right-anonymity-matter...

FullMtlAlcoholc 10y ago
It's not a moral duty, it's a Robb Report level luxury. One does not need to be particularly articulate or present a rational argument, especially when dealing with matters of morality. Sadly, rhetoric and appeals to emotion, empathy, and common sense are more effective if your goal is to sway others. > This phrase does not mean "All good men should continually natter on". It is also your moral duty to present a cogent argument What I was trying to say is there will be times where you are not as prepared as you like. It's not about presenting an airtight, cogent argument, it's about having the courage to say something like, "Officer, stop beating the shit out of this guy in a wheelchair. He's clearly isn't resisting and you're being a dick."