3 ms·
>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 en
by 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 agoWe 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 agoSo 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.