4 ms·

Tldnr: Pinker can publicly say whatever he wishes and participate in any linguist society activities, but his public discourse is at odds with the LSA's officia

by aaplok 6y ago

Tldnr: Pinker can publicly say whatever he wishes and participate in any linguist society activities, but his public discourse is at odds with the LSA's officially stated goals. Therefore he should not be given representative powers for the society, which being a distinguished fellow grants him. Agree with this sentiment or not, but TFA does not do a good job summarising the issue.

rumanator 6y ago
> but his public discourse is at odds with the LSA's officially stated goals. It should be noted that the complain singles out LSA's stated goals of "listening to and respecting [the experience of students of color] is crucial", but their criticism of Pinker is that they feel he doesn't support their pet cause enthusiastically enough. And to substantiate their accusation, the persecuters cherry-pick a hand-full of tweets dating way back from 2015, where he cited the New York Times showing real-world statistics on police shootings. So, I feel the article summarizes the problem pretty well. This is a good example of how this Cancel Culture systematically resorts to persecutions and chilling effects as weapons to punish and censor away anyone who doesn't enthusiastically endorse their pet political cause.
- aaplok 6y ago
  I didn't find their case to be well made either. But what they are asking is for Pinker to not appear to speak in their name. They state explicitly that they don't request that any of his public discourse to be removed or censored. This doesn't seem to be an example of cancel culture to me, because it is not an issue of freedom of speech or of opinion vs audience sensibilities. It is an issue of representativity. If the letter states explicitly that they don't question Pinker's right to free speech, then in my view the article misrepresents the argument by talking about an "outcry over free speech". For what it's worth, I don't personally believe that the right solution is to remove Pinker from that position, but rather to aim to increase diversity among the fellows of that society. But then I'm not a member of the linguists' society, nor even a linguist so I also believe that my personal opinion shouldn't matter here.
  - rumanator 6y ago
    > But what they are asking is for Pinker to not appear to speak in their name. No, they don't. The petitioners demand that Pinker should be taken out of the distinguished lecturers list regardless of his academic merit, which no one has any doubt it is well deserved. The reason? Because the petitioners feel he doesn't show enough enthusiasm supporting their own pet political views. The evidence? A pair of tweets posted in 2014 and 2015. Therefore, he must be punished for his crimes and made an example to everyone who dares not support their political pressure group. Make no mistake: this sort of fascist stunt to silence each and every "reactionary", whether they oppose their political views or simply doesn't further their agenda, poses a very dangerous threat to any democracy. They might not color-coordinate their shirts yet, but they're running plays from Italy's and Germany's inter-war period.

by aaplok 6y ago

rumanator 6y ago

> but his public discourse is at odds with the LSA's officially stated goals. It should be noted that the complain singles out LSA's stated goals of "listening to and respecting [the experience of students of color] is crucial", but their criticism of Pinker is that they feel he doesn't support their pet cause enthusiastically enough. And to substantiate their accusation, the persecuters cherry-pick a hand-full of tweets dating way back from 2015, where he cited the New York Times showing real-world statistics on police shootings. So, I feel the article summarizes the problem pretty well. This is a good example of how this Cancel Culture systematically resorts to persecutions and chilling effects as weapons to punish and censor away anyone who doesn't enthusiastically endorse their pet political cause.

aaplok 6y ago
I didn't find their case to be well made either. But what they are asking is for Pinker to not appear to speak in their name. They state explicitly that they don't request that any of his public discourse to be removed or censored. This doesn't seem to be an example of cancel culture to me, because it is not an issue of freedom of speech or of opinion vs audience sensibilities. It is an issue of representativity. If the letter states explicitly that they don't question Pinker's right to free speech, then in my view the article misrepresents the argument by talking about an "outcry over free speech". For what it's worth, I don't personally believe that the right solution is to remove Pinker from that position, but rather to aim to increase diversity among the fellows of that society. But then I'm not a member of the linguists' society, nor even a linguist so I also believe that my personal opinion shouldn't matter here.
- rumanator 6y ago
  > But what they are asking is for Pinker to not appear to speak in their name. No, they don't. The petitioners demand that Pinker should be taken out of the distinguished lecturers list regardless of his academic merit, which no one has any doubt it is well deserved. The reason? Because the petitioners feel he doesn't show enough enthusiasm supporting their own pet political views. The evidence? A pair of tweets posted in 2014 and 2015. Therefore, he must be punished for his crimes and made an example to everyone who dares not support their political pressure group. Make no mistake: this sort of fascist stunt to silence each and every "reactionary", whether they oppose their political views or simply doesn't further their agenda, poses a very dangerous threat to any democracy. They might not color-coordinate their shirts yet, but they're running plays from Italy's and Germany's inter-war period.