5 ms·

It is absolutely possible to disagree with that letter and the quoted sentence in good faith.

by geofft 8y ago

devoply 8y ago
Going after someone's career for a perfectly legitimate voiced opinion is not good faith regardless of disagreement. Also in general this whole idea of empowerment through silencing is what nasty religions have done in the past, shunning people for speaking their truth. It's a disgusting tactic and people using it to silence legitimate discourse should instead be shunned.
- mirimir 8y ago
  Yes, and yes. But I don't believe that anyone should be shunned. Maybe thrown in jail, if they hurt others, but not shunned.
- krastanov 8y ago
  You are missing a couple of facts, namely, they were not simply faculty, they were also in very particular and prestigious mentorship positions at the college. How can you be a mentor if you dismis the concerns of your students? This whole debacle was not over just some stupid letter, rather it was over the complete lack of empathy in the conversation that followed.
  - ALittleLight 8y ago
    How can you be a mentor for college students if you indulge them in childish delusions?
  - imgabe 8y ago
    You are confusing "disagree" with "dismiss". I don't think they dismissed the concerns of their students, I think they disagreed with the students' proposed solution and explained their reasoning. What kind of mentor would they be if they acquiesced to every demand a student makes, even when they believed it to be incorrect? Is not the purpose of having a mentor to learn from them, not to have them simply confirm everything you already want to believe?
  - rdtsc 8y ago
    > How can you be a mentor if you dismis the concerns of your students? Just curious, what would be the opposite of them dismissing the concerns. It seems you have been there and have a better perspective on things. So given the context at that time, how should this professor have reacted that would have been satisfactory for the students?
    - krastanov 8y ago
      I would say the debacle was worsened[1] due to poor communication on everyone's part, but the professor focused on a topic that was not the main complaint of the students (the prof was also officially hired in a prestigious mentorship position, with expectations to listen to comments about bullying/racism/sexism). Most people agreed with what he said about free speech, but the main complaints about consistent casual racism (comments only tangentially related to the stupid letter that started the discussion) were never responded to. A simple acknowledgement that "yes, I now see that you face casual racism on a daily basis here at Yale, so let's work together on educating people about this casual racism" would have probably defused the situation. [1]: I mean, just see all the sibling comments that assume this whole thing was about some stupid letter about costumes, and everyone calling all the students childish and dismissing their legitimate concerns (not even trying to find out what these concerns were) because they have seen the reaction of a couple overly-emotional students on YouTube.
      - rdtsc 8y ago
        > A simple acknowledgement that "yes, I now see that you face casual racism on a daily basis here at Yale, so let's work together on educating people about this casual racism" would have probably defused the situation. That does make sense. In a way a lot of conflicts suffer from this. It is not always just the issue that starts the confrontation but there is a whole "iceberg" part hiding underneath that's not being usually addressed and might not be visible to a casual observer. > I mean, just see all the sibling comments Thank you for taking the time to respond. That's why I wanted your opinion as you seems have been there and are aware of a larger context.
imgabe 8y ago
It is possible to be wrong in good faith, yes. That doesn't make it not wrong. I don't think anyone accused the students of arguing in bad faith. I think they sincerely believe what they were saying. I also think they were wrong.
- geofft 8y ago
  Bad faith doesn't require lack of sincere belief. Perhaps the most common form of bad-faith disagreement is when you disagree with someone and are unwilling to really listen to what they say for fear that it would cause you to rethink your current sincere belief. What I'm saying is that it seems likely the students understand exactly what was written in that latter and how the argument in that letter could be steelmanned, and that they also understand their own point of view in depth, and they should not be dismissed as people so wrong as to be un-serious debaters.
  - simonh 8y ago
    I don’t really see how, if you sincerely believe something, you can be afraid to listen to an argument in case it dissuades you of it. That seems to me to be a blatant disregard for whether what you ‘believe’ is actually true. Furthermore it is also a blatant disregard for whether what you think someone means is actually what they are saying. That really is bad faith in a pretty raw form.
    - DanBC 8y ago
      > if you sincerely believe something, you can be afraid to listen to an argument in case it dissuades you of it. I know the holocaust happened. I don't need to listen to holocaust deniers talking about the size of the ovens or any of their other talking points. I know I'm not going to change their mind; I know they're not going to change my mind. I also know that my society is better because we teach children about these points of denial without suggesting that they're true.
      - yostrovs 8y ago
sonnyblarney 8y ago
a) Curious to know how one could reasonably disagree with it? b) More importantly: how on earth such a letter could cause alarm, to the point where someone had to be fired. It's on the 'b' point that the SJW's not only lose the argument, but should be quashed. Controversial statements require nuance, but this is not even that. It's not controversial. That Yale would dump someone for such a statement is shocking. It makes me wary almost to the point of conspiratorial as to who on earth could possibly be happening.
- krastanov 8y ago
  You are being rather reactionary. If the premise of your questions was true, I would indeed find the situation as ridiculous as you do. But the problem was not just the stupid letter, it was the tone deaf way in which they disregarded any feedback in the conversation that ensued. They were hired to be mentors for these students (separately from their faculty positions) but made no honest attempt to listen to them, which resulted in everyone being frustrated.
  - geezerjay 8y ago
    > You are being rather reactionary. That's very telling of the motivations behind this stunt.
    - krastanov 8y ago
      Could you elaborate? There are multiple mutually-exclusive ways I can interpret your comment.
- dang 8y ago
  Would you please stop posting ideological battle comments and flamebait to HN? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
manfredo 8y ago
There's a difference between disagreeing, and being brought to tears by the fact that a college professor's wife said that adults should be able to pick their own Halloween costumes and explicitly calling for said professor to be fired: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiMVx2C5_Wg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiMVx2C5_Wg This video was surreal, I had trouble convincing myself this wasn't some sort of hoax.

It is absolutely possible to disagree with that letter and the quoted sentence in good faith.

by geofft 8y ago

It is absolutely possible to disagree with that letter and the quoted sentence in good faith.

Going after someone's career for a perfectly legitimate voiced opinion is not good faith regardless of disagreement. Also in general this whole idea of empowerment through silencing is what nasty religions have done in the past, shunning people for speaking their truth. It's a disgusting tactic and people using it to silence legitimate discourse should instead be shunned.

mirimir 8y ago
Yes, and yes. But I don't believe that anyone should be shunned. Maybe thrown in jail, if they hurt others, but not shunned.
krastanov 8y ago
You are missing a couple of facts, namely, they were not simply faculty, they were also in very particular and prestigious mentorship positions at the college. How can you be a mentor if you dismis the concerns of your students? This whole debacle was not over just some stupid letter, rather it was over the complete lack of empathy in the conversation that followed.
- ALittleLight 8y ago
  How can you be a mentor for college students if you indulge them in childish delusions?
- imgabe 8y ago
  You are confusing "disagree" with "dismiss". I don't think they dismissed the concerns of their students, I think they disagreed with the students' proposed solution and explained their reasoning. What kind of mentor would they be if they acquiesced to every demand a student makes, even when they believed it to be incorrect? Is not the purpose of having a mentor to learn from them, not to have them simply confirm everything you already want to believe?
- rdtsc 8y ago
  > How can you be a mentor if you dismis the concerns of your students? Just curious, what would be the opposite of them dismissing the concerns. It seems you have been there and have a better perspective on things. So given the context at that time, how should this professor have reacted that would have been satisfactory for the students?
  - krastanov 8y ago
    I would say the debacle was worsened[1] due to poor communication on everyone's part, but the professor focused on a topic that was not the main complaint of the students (the prof was also officially hired in a prestigious mentorship position, with expectations to listen to comments about bullying/racism/sexism). Most people agreed with what he said about free speech, but the main complaints about consistent casual racism (comments only tangentially related to the stupid letter that started the discussion) were never responded to. A simple acknowledgement that "yes, I now see that you face casual racism on a daily basis here at Yale, so let's work together on educating people about this casual racism" would have probably defused the situation. [1]: I mean, just see all the sibling comments that assume this whole thing was about some stupid letter about costumes, and everyone calling all the students childish and dismissing their legitimate concerns (not even trying to find out what these concerns were) because they have seen the reaction of a couple overly-emotional students on YouTube.
    - rdtsc 8y ago
      > A simple acknowledgement that "yes, I now see that you face casual racism on a daily basis here at Yale, so let's work together on educating people about this casual racism" would have probably defused the situation. That does make sense. In a way a lot of conflicts suffer from this. It is not always just the issue that starts the confrontation but there is a whole "iceberg" part hiding underneath that's not being usually addressed and might not be visible to a casual observer. > I mean, just see all the sibling comments Thank you for taking the time to respond. That's why I wanted your opinion as you seems have been there and are aware of a larger context.

imgabe 8y ago

It is possible to be wrong in good faith, yes. That doesn't make it not wrong. I don't think anyone accused the students of arguing in bad faith. I think they sincerely believe what they were saying. I also think they were wrong.

geofft 8y ago
Bad faith doesn't require lack of sincere belief. Perhaps the most common form of bad-faith disagreement is when you disagree with someone and are unwilling to really listen to what they say for fear that it would cause you to rethink your current sincere belief. What I'm saying is that it seems likely the students understand exactly what was written in that latter and how the argument in that letter could be steelmanned, and that they also understand their own point of view in depth, and they should not be dismissed as people so wrong as to be un-serious debaters.
- simonh 8y ago
  I don’t really see how, if you sincerely believe something, you can be afraid to listen to an argument in case it dissuades you of it. That seems to me to be a blatant disregard for whether what you ‘believe’ is actually true. Furthermore it is also a blatant disregard for whether what you think someone means is actually what they are saying. That really is bad faith in a pretty raw form.
  - DanBC 8y ago
    > if you sincerely believe something, you can be afraid to listen to an argument in case it dissuades you of it. I know the holocaust happened. I don't need to listen to holocaust deniers talking about the size of the ovens or any of their other talking points. I know I'm not going to change their mind; I know they're not going to change my mind. I also know that my society is better because we teach children about these points of denial without suggesting that they're true.
    - yostrovs 8y ago

sonnyblarney 8y ago

a) Curious to know how one could reasonably disagree with it? b) More importantly: how on earth such a letter could cause alarm, to the point where someone had to be fired. It's on the 'b' point that the SJW's not only lose the argument, but should be quashed. Controversial statements require nuance, but this is not even that. It's not controversial. That Yale would dump someone for such a statement is shocking. It makes me wary almost to the point of conspiratorial as to who on earth could possibly be happening.

krastanov 8y ago
You are being rather reactionary. If the premise of your questions was true, I would indeed find the situation as ridiculous as you do. But the problem was not just the stupid letter, it was the tone deaf way in which they disregarded any feedback in the conversation that ensued. They were hired to be mentors for these students (separately from their faculty positions) but made no honest attempt to listen to them, which resulted in everyone being frustrated.
- geezerjay 8y ago
  > You are being rather reactionary. That's very telling of the motivations behind this stunt.
  - krastanov 8y ago
    Could you elaborate? There are multiple mutually-exclusive ways I can interpret your comment.
dang 8y ago
Would you please stop posting ideological battle comments and flamebait to HN? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

manfredo 8y ago

There's a difference between disagreeing, and being brought to tears by the fact that a college professor's wife said that adults should be able to pick their own Halloween costumes and explicitly calling for said professor to be fired: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiMVx2C5_Wg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hiMVx2C5_Wg This video was surreal, I had trouble convincing myself this wasn't some sort of hoax.