4 ms·
> Who is suggesting that the solution is to restrict speech? Look at the comments, you'll see that people are more than willing to take it upon themselves to o
by charliesharding 8y ago
> Who is suggesting that the solution is to restrict speech?
Look at the comments, you'll see that people are more than willing to take it upon themselves to ostracize independent thinkers and skeptics.
Look at the article and how it's been upvoted on HN because of the premise of how evil and ridiculous it is.
- krapp 8y ago>Look at the comments, you'll see that people are more than willing to take it upon themselves to ostracize independent thinkers and skeptics. Why do you believe "independent thinkers and skeptics" should be allowed to disagree with the status quo, but that disagreeing with them is tantamount to censorship and restricting speech? >Look at the article and how it's been upvoted on HN because of the premise of how evil and ridiculous it is. Yes. People believe it's ridiculous... and meanwhile plenty of skeptics believe mainstream science is ridiculous. You can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't support criticism and not expect criticism in return.
- stcredzero 8y agoWhy do you believe "independent thinkers and skeptics" should be allowed to disagree with the status quo, but that disagreeing with them is tantamount to censorship and restricting speech? Disagreeing and debunking is fine. Deplatforming isn't. Trying to garner emotional sentiment against people without rational argument is a bit beyond the line. Throwing around headlines to create emotional associations is a bit beyond the line. Discussing the facts is good. and meanwhile plenty of skeptics believe mainstream science is ridiculous. There are some far left progressives who would deny all evolutionary biology in order to completely deny biological sex differences, primarily on ideological grounds. I find that just as bad as denying evolution on ideological grounds. You can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't support criticism and not expect criticism in return. Criticism is fine. Engaging in that in good faith is supporting Free Speech. Deplatforming and tactics for silencing argument aren't fine. Those go against the spirit of Free Speech.
- glangdale 8y agoI am enjoying the ludicrous idea that climate-change deniers could possibly be deplatformed, when there a literally billionaires lining up to ensure that any hint of confusion about climate science is amplified. No-one can stop Thiel from funding whoever he likes; they would just like to be sure that it doesn't go unnoticed that this journal reads more like "Peter Thiel's Journal Of Collected Contrarianism That He Personally Paid For Due To Some Probably Totally Legitimate Reason" and less like "Inference: International Review of Science.”
- stcredzero 8y agoI am enjoying the ludicrous idea that climate-change deniers could possibly be deplatformed Even if we could, we shouldn't. It's important that everyone feels they have a voice. Even people who are wrong should get to participate in society and have rights. No-one can stop Thiel from funding whoever he likes; they would just like to be sure that it doesn't go unnoticed that this journal reads more like "Peter Thiel's Journal Of Collected Contrarianism That He Personally Paid For Due To Some Probably Totally Legitimate Reason" That's fine. Un-personing to silence isn't.
- charliesharding 8y agoI'm glad people like you exist here on HN. I'm shocked that this kind of simple reasoning is somehow rejected by otherwise rational people these days..