4 ms·

It's not the first time that pg alludes to "what you can't say". It would be nice if he could at least outline what it is that he believes he's not allowed to s

by pyb 6y ago

It's not the first time that pg alludes to "what you can't say". It would be nice if he could at least outline what it is that he believes he's not allowed to say. Otherwise the discussion remains exceedingly abstract. Furthermore, some may assume the worst of whatever he had in mind that "can't be said"

gridlockd 6y ago
“All lives matter”
- GenerocUsername 6y ago
  "Its ok to be white"
ksdale 6y ago
He explicitly mentions that whenever you talk about speech in the abstract, people will assume you believe whatever thing they don't like. Agree with him or not, I think it completely misses his point to need to hear his opinions before you decide whether he's correct in the abstract about speech.
- pyb 6y ago
  It's true that the 2nd half of the post (which I should have read before commenting) is a retort to my objection. If I understand well, the response is that I am blessed (?) with "orthodox privilege".
wry_discontent 6y ago
Nobody who complains about cancel culture can actually do that cause they'll out what they really mean, which is something like "I want to say racist/sexist shit but can't cause I'll get in trouble now."
- gridlockd 6y ago
  It's more like: "I can't say anything that someone somewhere might uncharitably interpret as sexist/racist/transphobic/homophobic or else I get in trouble now." For instance, pointing out scientifically well-established differences between genders and daring to draw the conclusion that maybe gender inequity is not entirely the fault of a sexist white cismale conspiracy - that will probably get you cancelled.
- ksdale 6y ago
  From the essay: "The more extreme will even accuse you of specific heresies they imagine you must have in mind, though if there's more than one heresy current in your time, these accusations will tend to be nondeterministic: you must either be an xist or a yist."
  - wry_discontent 6y ago
    Yes, in life I make inferences on incomplete data. Racists online regularly complain about PC run amok and cancel culture, so if you complain about "cancel culture" too much in purely abstract terms, I don't really trust you. There exist people I'd like to cancel in the harshest sense. Cite specific instances, and maybe we can be on the same side.
    - ksdale 6y ago
      I think your inference-making algorithm doesn't distinguish between people who earnestly hold strong beliefs about speech, and racists. Perhaps there are so many more racists that it doesn't matter...
- blablabla123 6y ago
  And that's a really recent phenomenon, and least if you somehow come from the conservative "orthodox" part of society, also considering popular culture, plots of Hollywood movies in particular. Also there is a difference in having a proper discourse and just spilling out controversial opinions. I think in a philosophical context it's possible to discuss all sorts of things, in fact that's very much where the updated - and more critical - ethics comes from.
topspin 6y ago
> It would be nice if he could at least outline what it is that he believes he's not allowed to say. Ironic: "Why don't you just say it?" He avoids doing that because as both he and you know perfectly well the Orthodoxy would crush him for his heresy.
dragonwriter 6y ago
> It would be nice if he could at least outline what it is that he believes he's not allowed to say. If he did that, the near-certain fact that whatever he is complaining about is regularly said by people who are prominent and active figures would kind of negate his point. I mean, at least, every time anyone else makes the mistake of making this argument with specific examples of things that are supposedly not allowed, that's the case. But as long as there are no specific examples, the claim is not meaningfully debatable, which is preferable to the one making it, when it is false, than if it is easily falsified.

by pyb 6y ago

gridlockd 6y ago

“All lives matter”

GenerocUsername 6y ago
"Its ok to be white"

ksdale 6y ago

He explicitly mentions that whenever you talk about speech in the abstract, people will assume you believe whatever thing they don't like. Agree with him or not, I think it completely misses his point to need to hear his opinions before you decide whether he's correct in the abstract about speech.

pyb 6y ago
It's true that the 2nd half of the post (which I should have read before commenting) is a retort to my objection. If I understand well, the response is that I am blessed (?) with "orthodox privilege".

wry_discontent 6y ago

Nobody who complains about cancel culture can actually do that cause they'll out what they really mean, which is something like "I want to say racist/sexist shit but can't cause I'll get in trouble now."

gridlockd 6y ago
It's more like: "I can't say anything that someone somewhere might uncharitably interpret as sexist/racist/transphobic/homophobic or else I get in trouble now." For instance, pointing out scientifically well-established differences between genders and daring to draw the conclusion that maybe gender inequity is not entirely the fault of a sexist white cismale conspiracy - that will probably get you cancelled.
ksdale 6y ago
From the essay: "The more extreme will even accuse you of specific heresies they imagine you must have in mind, though if there's more than one heresy current in your time, these accusations will tend to be nondeterministic: you must either be an xist or a yist."
- wry_discontent 6y ago
  Yes, in life I make inferences on incomplete data. Racists online regularly complain about PC run amok and cancel culture, so if you complain about "cancel culture" too much in purely abstract terms, I don't really trust you. There exist people I'd like to cancel in the harshest sense. Cite specific instances, and maybe we can be on the same side.
  - ksdale 6y ago
    I think your inference-making algorithm doesn't distinguish between people who earnestly hold strong beliefs about speech, and racists. Perhaps there are so many more racists that it doesn't matter...
blablabla123 6y ago
And that's a really recent phenomenon, and least if you somehow come from the conservative "orthodox" part of society, also considering popular culture, plots of Hollywood movies in particular. Also there is a difference in having a proper discourse and just spilling out controversial opinions. I think in a philosophical context it's possible to discuss all sorts of things, in fact that's very much where the updated - and more critical - ethics comes from.

topspin 6y ago

> It would be nice if he could at least outline what it is that he believes he's not allowed to say. Ironic: "Why don't you just say it?" He avoids doing that because as both he and you know perfectly well the Orthodoxy would crush him for his heresy.

dragonwriter 6y ago

> It would be nice if he could at least outline what it is that he believes he's not allowed to say. If he did that, the near-certain fact that whatever he is complaining about is regularly said by people who are prominent and active figures would kind of negate his point. I mean, at least, every time anyone else makes the mistake of making this argument with specific examples of things that are supposedly not allowed, that's the case. But as long as there are no specific examples, the claim is not meaningfully debatable, which is preferable to the one making it, when it is false, than if it is easily falsified.