3 ms·

Should Freud's books be pulled too for being unscientific?

mikestew 8y ago
Your question would be better directed to Amazon's buyers, as it's their store and they get to decide what they do and do not sell.
ashleyn 8y ago
Freud's books aren't currently inflaming a public health crisis. That being said, if Amazon felt as such, they could do it for whatever reason they felt. Or not do it. The point is that if they're not a monopoly, private or public, the argument that populism supercedes their property rights is a very poor one.
- asdffdsa 8y ago
  Freud's books when they came out were wildly inflammatory. I'm not really arguing against Amazon's right to not publish, I'm trying to figure out when it is acceptable for people to censor ideas so others will not discover them, and on what basis something should be deemed 'ignorant' given the complication that each individual is subject to the ignorance of their time.
  - toomanyrichies 8y ago
    > I’m trying to figure out when it is acceptable for people to censor ideas so others will not discover them Perhaps when not doing so would perpetuate the resurgence of a life-threatening disease that, until 20 years ago, was virtually eliminated in the US? > each individual is subject to the ignorance of their time. True. They are also subject to the responsibility to think rationally and use the provable, reproducible evidence at their disposal to make decisions. Especially when those decisions have life-or-death implications not only for their children, but others’ children as well.
rubyn00bie 8y ago
You’re making a false equivalency. Freud’s books were once considered science and are, at a minimum, of historical value. These are not scientific. They are not necessary for historical purposes or archiving. They are purely malicious words made to ruin people’s lives for profit...
- easytiger 8y ago
  OK. So now amazon decide to ban something you agree with? What then?
  - daenz 8y ago
    Then it will become "the government should make laws to stop private businesses from doing that," like it always does. People who defend censorship with the private business argument are often arguing in bad faith, because they don't really support the rights of private businesses, they're just using that angle to convince those that do.

Your question would be better directed to Amazon's buyers, as it's their store and they get to decide what they do and do not sell.

ashleyn 8y ago

Freud's books aren't currently inflaming a public health crisis. That being said, if Amazon felt as such, they could do it for whatever reason they felt. Or not do it. The point is that if they're not a monopoly, private or public, the argument that populism supercedes their property rights is a very poor one.

asdffdsa 8y ago
Freud's books when they came out were wildly inflammatory. I'm not really arguing against Amazon's right to not publish, I'm trying to figure out when it is acceptable for people to censor ideas so others will not discover them, and on what basis something should be deemed 'ignorant' given the complication that each individual is subject to the ignorance of their time.
- toomanyrichies 8y ago
  > I’m trying to figure out when it is acceptable for people to censor ideas so others will not discover them Perhaps when not doing so would perpetuate the resurgence of a life-threatening disease that, until 20 years ago, was virtually eliminated in the US? > each individual is subject to the ignorance of their time. True. They are also subject to the responsibility to think rationally and use the provable, reproducible evidence at their disposal to make decisions. Especially when those decisions have life-or-death implications not only for their children, but others’ children as well.

rubyn00bie 8y ago

You’re making a false equivalency. Freud’s books were once considered science and are, at a minimum, of historical value. These are not scientific. They are not necessary for historical purposes or archiving. They are purely malicious words made to ruin people’s lives for profit...

easytiger 8y ago
OK. So now amazon decide to ban something you agree with? What then?
- daenz 8y ago
  Then it will become "the government should make laws to stop private businesses from doing that," like it always does. People who defend censorship with the private business argument are often arguing in bad faith, because they don't really support the rights of private businesses, they're just using that angle to convince those that do.