3 ms·

That just moves the locus of disagreement to a different place, to whether the argument is respectful or not. And the risk is it will be less intellectually hon

That just moves the locus of disagreement to a different place, to whether the argument is respectful or not. And the risk is it will be less intellectually honest. For example, what if I argued in favour of racial segregation of schools because it would give a better environment for children to learn in, being around role models they could easily identify with and not get sucked into cultural traps like thinking being academically excellent means you're acting white. I think this is a racist position. It explicitly discriminates on the basis of race. I also think it could be an honest argument. Is it respectful? I personally think it is. (To be clear, I'm not in favour of racial segregation of schools. The "acting white" thing is overdone and normalizing a binary division isn't good.)

mikeash 8y ago
What about the kids who don’t fit neatly into either category? You’ll be throwing a bunch of people into a group in an arbitrary fashion and then teaching them, perhaps just implicitly, that the group’s standards are “normal” and they are different. By saying this is a good thing you’re disrespecting a ton of people. This is part of why a racist argument can’t be respectful: it’s fundamentally opposed to basic reality. Is it possible that such an argument could be made honestly? Sure, by an ignorant nimrod. Does that make it respectful? No, part of respect in an argument is making sure you have a grasp of the basic facts before you spout off. Is it bad to block ignorant but honest nimrods in an attempt to block racist shitheads who have learned to cloak their arguments in polite-sounding language? No, for every ignorant nimrod there are a hundred racist shitheads, and you’re not going to educate the ignorant nimrods by giving equal footing to the racist shitheads.
- barrkel 8y ago
  You've descended straight to namecalling (in the abstract, I hasten to add - your counterargument is similar to mine). I don't think your counterargument is nearly as respectful - it's outright ad hominem. Have a listen to this if you can find the time: http://revisionisthistory.com/episodes/13-miss-buchanans-period-of-adjustment http://revisionisthistory.com/episodes/13-miss-buchanans-per... It was enlightening to learn the subtleties of segregation at the time, from black people in the period. It might not change your mind, but it would lead you to be less hasty to descend to namecalling, not least because you'd learn who you risk calling ignorant racist shitheads.
  - mikeash 8y ago
    My comment contains two separate arguments. The one against school segregation is perfectly respectful and based on the facts. The argument against giving racist shitheads a platform does involve namecalling, and I don’t much care.

mikeash 8y ago

What about the kids who don’t fit neatly into either category? You’ll be throwing a bunch of people into a group in an arbitrary fashion and then teaching them, perhaps just implicitly, that the group’s standards are “normal” and they are different. By saying this is a good thing you’re disrespecting a ton of people. This is part of why a racist argument can’t be respectful: it’s fundamentally opposed to basic reality. Is it possible that such an argument could be made honestly? Sure, by an ignorant nimrod. Does that make it respectful? No, part of respect in an argument is making sure you have a grasp of the basic facts before you spout off. Is it bad to block ignorant but honest nimrods in an attempt to block racist shitheads who have learned to cloak their arguments in polite-sounding language? No, for every ignorant nimrod there are a hundred racist shitheads, and you’re not going to educate the ignorant nimrods by giving equal footing to the racist shitheads.

barrkel 8y ago
You've descended straight to namecalling (in the abstract, I hasten to add - your counterargument is similar to mine). I don't think your counterargument is nearly as respectful - it's outright ad hominem. Have a listen to this if you can find the time: http://revisionisthistory.com/episodes/13-miss-buchanans-period-of-adjustment http://revisionisthistory.com/episodes/13-miss-buchanans-per... It was enlightening to learn the subtleties of segregation at the time, from black people in the period. It might not change your mind, but it would lead you to be less hasty to descend to namecalling, not least because you'd learn who you risk calling ignorant racist shitheads.
- mikeash 8y ago
  My comment contains two separate arguments. The one against school segregation is perfectly respectful and based on the facts. The argument against giving racist shitheads a platform does involve namecalling, and I don’t much care.