2 ms·
I came here to mention a similar comment. Ultimately, I think the success will be determined by the fact (hypothesis?) that if you de-center the author's autho
by s3r3nity 8y ago
I came here to mention a similar comment.
Ultimately, I think the success will be determined by the fact (hypothesis?) that if you de-center the author's authority from the argument about the validity of an argument or idea, you can instead re-center to something more foundational and logical.
i.e. actually discussing the idea itself, rather than name-calling and mud-slinging as a form of discourse ("This person is a crazy Nazi / Maoist / Fascist / etc etc. - therefore how can you believe anything they say?")
- giantsloth 8y agoI’m not worried about the fictitious and overblown “SJW” strawman youtube has lead everyone to believe are everywhere. I’m worried about corporate interests, ideologues, and charlatans publishing biased nonsense and making the world even more crowded with bad information without any recourse or ability to investigate what the motives behind the papers may have been.
- s3r3nity 8y agoBut this just leads back to my original point - the motives or authority of the speaker for an idea should have little weight into whether or not it's valid or sound. If there is bad information or a biased approach, that would be easy to root out when focused on the facts and logic in a vacuum. Editorializing or investigation into possible motives and the like puts the discussion on something that is not as important.