3 ms·

Thank goodness we are still able to make the case. The only alternative to free speech is violence. I want to be able to hear what the alt-right has to say, wha

Thank goodness we are still able to make the case. The only alternative to free speech is violence. I want to be able to hear what the alt-right has to say, what Islamic extremists have to say, what misogynists have to say, etc.

sideshowb 9y ago
Hoping that's not a sarcastic comment (it's hard to tell online). I want to be able to hear what all those people have to say, so I can try to persuade them that they're wrong.
- Ygg2 9y ago
  > so I can try to persuade them that they're wrong. I think this is really difficult, but a worthwhile goal. In all honesty my goal would be to understand where they are coming from and help turn them or future generations from such course.
- roceasta 9y ago
  Not sarcastic. Yes, persuade people they are wrong where they are wrong; learn from them where they are right (we are all fallible). Persuade other people that they are wrong; teach other people where they are right. Plus an unlimited number of other possible responses. >I can try to persuade them that they're wrong That assumes you know what their ideas are. If present trends against free speech continue, it's not a luxury you're necessarily going to have.
  - sideshowb 9y ago
    Yes, learn from people where they are right as well - +1 to that. It might be that they're none of the horrible things people claim and are just victims of unfortunate name calling or mud slinging.
- Cthulhu_ 9y ago
  The problem with the parties mentioned in the grandparent comment (nazis, alt-right, islamic extremism, and on the (claimed) other side of the spectrum, antifa, SJW's, environmental extremists, etc) is that their claims are often backed by emotions (we hate $demographic), but said claims also incite a strong emotional response (often from one's morals - e.g. you should not be racist). Emotional responses is not logical discourse. Also, morals, norms and values are very hard to change. I mean most people - including you I believe? have a moral saying "Murder is wrong". I don't know how to convince you to change that moral. But, when it comes to issues inciting a strong emotional response, that becomes easier. "It's wrong to punch people in the face" becomes a much more flexible norm when said person is a nazi. "Murder and the death penalty are wrong" is a norm that becomes looser when it concerns someone that raped your child. TL;DR, persuading someone off their values and moral codes is not trivial. Those are things that take a long time, gradual and long-term campaigning, subtle cues of acceptance. They do work, mind you; 70 years ago, homosexuality was a crime and the punishment was castration (Turing), nowadays it's much more accepted and gradually becoming normal.
  - eesmith 9y ago
    BTW, since you mentioned him in another comment, Einstein was an SJW.

sideshowb 9y ago

Hoping that's not a sarcastic comment (it's hard to tell online). I want to be able to hear what all those people have to say, so I can try to persuade them that they're wrong.

Ygg2 9y ago
> so I can try to persuade them that they're wrong. I think this is really difficult, but a worthwhile goal. In all honesty my goal would be to understand where they are coming from and help turn them or future generations from such course.
roceasta 9y ago
Not sarcastic. Yes, persuade people they are wrong where they are wrong; learn from them where they are right (we are all fallible). Persuade other people that they are wrong; teach other people where they are right. Plus an unlimited number of other possible responses. >I can try to persuade them that they're wrong That assumes you know what their ideas are. If present trends against free speech continue, it's not a luxury you're necessarily going to have.
- sideshowb 9y ago
  Yes, learn from people where they are right as well - +1 to that. It might be that they're none of the horrible things people claim and are just victims of unfortunate name calling or mud slinging.
Cthulhu_ 9y ago
The problem with the parties mentioned in the grandparent comment (nazis, alt-right, islamic extremism, and on the (claimed) other side of the spectrum, antifa, SJW's, environmental extremists, etc) is that their claims are often backed by emotions (we hate $demographic), but said claims also incite a strong emotional response (often from one's morals - e.g. you should not be racist). Emotional responses is not logical discourse. Also, morals, norms and values are very hard to change. I mean most people - including you I believe? have a moral saying "Murder is wrong". I don't know how to convince you to change that moral. But, when it comes to issues inciting a strong emotional response, that becomes easier. "It's wrong to punch people in the face" becomes a much more flexible norm when said person is a nazi. "Murder and the death penalty are wrong" is a norm that becomes looser when it concerns someone that raped your child. TL;DR, persuading someone off their values and moral codes is not trivial. Those are things that take a long time, gradual and long-term campaigning, subtle cues of acceptance. They do work, mind you; 70 years ago, homosexuality was a crime and the punishment was castration (Turing), nowadays it's much more accepted and gradually becoming normal.
- eesmith 9y ago
  BTW, since you mentioned him in another comment, Einstein was an SJW.