3 ms·
but stooping to underhanded publicity stunts instead of open intellectual conversation Attempts to have an open intellectual conversation, specially in these f
by bassman9000 8y ago
but stooping to underhanded publicity stunts instead of open intellectual conversation
Attempts to have an open intellectual conversation, specially in these fields, gets you deplatformed after SJW attacks, or draw people screeching when you attempt to debate at the Uni, to the point debates have to be cancelled by limp wristed admins.
The only way left if to use sarcasm , or these kind of maneuvers. What's the point of exposing the insane and unethical academia establishment if you have to tell them, in advance, they're being exposed?
- voidhorse 8y agoI'll grant that for sure. There are indeed plenty of politically motivated scholars (importantly, usually students! not professors!) that fail to meet challenges and intellectual/social hurdles gracefully, but much of the disdain for SJWs is predicated on a presumed moral high-ground—"we're better than them because we care about truth, and facts while they don't" (just as the so-called "SJW" types often feel their political motives are morally superior to those who are opposed to them). But if the opposition to the so-called "SJWs" has resorted to hoaxes and other fraudulent tactics, aren't they just as bad as the people they're fighting? Haven't they regressed to a similar tactic of "deplatforming" and effectively similarly nullifying the chance of an open debate? Both "sides" (and there really shouldn't be 'sides' in this—as in most cases the binary division line in this conflict is a gross oversimplification of the issues at stake) are guilty of poor decorum in the academic arena. Pots and kettles, really.