4 ms·

The problem is that people are believing things that are factually false and that leads them to cause problems for the entire group. Nothing that you described

by jmcqk6 6y ago

The problem is that people are believing things that are factually false and that leads them to cause problems for the entire group. Nothing that you described will fix that problem at all. How, exactly, are we going to fix that problem?

Covzire 6y ago
Allow people to speak. To use your climate change example, climate change experts need to engage the public, even people they disagree with. The fact that they're not creates the appearance they are dishonest or have alternative agendas. Universities are the worst for this, they no longer allow free speech almost anywhere, and do not engage with anyone who disagrees with them once they've decided they have all the facts. Even if they're right, engagement is the only possible way to a society without oppression by the people who think they have the facts and the longer they avoid engagement, the more they will become deranged even if they do start out completely and factually correct. Derangement is guaranteed in groups without full engagement of ideas and the media and universities (at large) are already at alarming levels of insanity in the ideas they're peddling, they've stopped engaging with critics long ago and now they want more power to silence those critics in their own homes. It's the definition of oppression masquerading as decency.
- jmcqk6 6y ago
  >The fact that they're not creates the appearance they are dishonest or have alternative agendas. What are you talking about? They are constantly trying to engage. Your comment about universities doesn't ring true to me either. Universities are where you're most likely to find free exchanges of ideas today. You can cherry pick counter examples, but that ignores the larger truth, and the reality of larger society. People do not want to hear how they are wrong. People do not want to be wrong. Allowing people to speak does not fix this problem. It does nothing to this problem at all. It is, in fact, the current reality. You speak of not engaging with critics, but what I've found is that the people who are ignoring basic facts about the world are the ones that are least likely to have honest exchanges about their own ideas. Still, you have offered no such solution to that problem.
  - Covzire 6y ago
    We seem to be at an impasse. You're saying they're constantly trying to engage, but I see something different. Reddit won't even allow "deniers" or anything that smells like a "denier" to speak. The scientific complex will absolutely ostracize anyone who tries to take any funding to research anything that could discredit the mainstream narrative. There is no public debate anymore, as Al Gore famously said, "The debate is over". Anyway I've given what I believe strongly is the only solution, and ideas like that espoused in this article are dangerous and won't help you or me.
    - jmcqk6 6y ago
      So we have a disagreement about the fundamental facts, and your solution is to stop the conversation. Thank you for perfectly illustrating the problem I'm talking about.

by jmcqk6 6y ago

Covzire 6y ago

Allow people to speak. To use your climate change example, climate change experts need to engage the public, even people they disagree with. The fact that they're not creates the appearance they are dishonest or have alternative agendas. Universities are the worst for this, they no longer allow free speech almost anywhere, and do not engage with anyone who disagrees with them once they've decided they have all the facts. Even if they're right, engagement is the only possible way to a society without oppression by the people who think they have the facts and the longer they avoid engagement, the more they will become deranged even if they do start out completely and factually correct. Derangement is guaranteed in groups without full engagement of ideas and the media and universities (at large) are already at alarming levels of insanity in the ideas they're peddling, they've stopped engaging with critics long ago and now they want more power to silence those critics in their own homes. It's the definition of oppression masquerading as decency.

jmcqk6 6y ago
>The fact that they're not creates the appearance they are dishonest or have alternative agendas. What are you talking about? They are constantly trying to engage. Your comment about universities doesn't ring true to me either. Universities are where you're most likely to find free exchanges of ideas today. You can cherry pick counter examples, but that ignores the larger truth, and the reality of larger society. People do not want to hear how they are wrong. People do not want to be wrong. Allowing people to speak does not fix this problem. It does nothing to this problem at all. It is, in fact, the current reality. You speak of not engaging with critics, but what I've found is that the people who are ignoring basic facts about the world are the ones that are least likely to have honest exchanges about their own ideas. Still, you have offered no such solution to that problem.
- Covzire 6y ago
  We seem to be at an impasse. You're saying they're constantly trying to engage, but I see something different. Reddit won't even allow "deniers" or anything that smells like a "denier" to speak. The scientific complex will absolutely ostracize anyone who tries to take any funding to research anything that could discredit the mainstream narrative. There is no public debate anymore, as Al Gore famously said, "The debate is over". Anyway I've given what I believe strongly is the only solution, and ideas like that espoused in this article are dangerous and won't help you or me.
  - jmcqk6 6y ago
    So we have a disagreement about the fundamental facts, and your solution is to stop the conversation. Thank you for perfectly illustrating the problem I'm talking about.