3 ms·
The point of the post you were responding to was not to discuss the details of this particular claim, it was to show that one of the best ways we can learn abou
by dnissley 6y ago
The point of the post you were responding to was not to discuss the details of this particular claim, it was to show that one of the best ways we can learn about perspectives beyond our own and discover the faults in our logic is through discussion.
It would seem you consider discussion a tool so dangerous (in that it can have real effects) that we should not have them unless we have a perfectly representative group of people taking part in that discussion. But that seems... extreme (e.g. it means that two people can't have a discussion, since two people will never approximately represent all of the groups making up our society). Perhaps you could clarify your claim?
- prepend 6y agoI certainly don’t want to have a pool of representative nazis to make sure we can have discussions about nazis. I think this is a illogical result of combining the “CNN Crossfire” style of politics with the good idea that more diverse experiences improves the conversation.