10 ms·

In this time of ultra conformism and cancel culture. It is refreshing to read an articulate alternative view points. Sowell has an experience of with sides of

In this time of ultra conformism and cancel culture. It is refreshing to read an articulate alternative view points. Sowell has an experience of with sides of the debate and brings that experience to his writing. I can't recommend him enough

gerland 6y ago
Oh, look. You got downvoted for stating an opinion. Gee, how could this happen? There definitely is no bias here, no sir.
altcognito 6y ago
What objective measure of conformism are you using?
- ajuc 6y ago
  Sum of squares of the differences on all important issues between you and the average? So basically the same formula as variance in probability theory.
  - altcognito 6y ago
    Well I mean at that level what counts as a difference and what’s the measure of that distance. I like that this is an attempt to define it even if is isn’t op and we do t actually have any actual numbers, past or present for comparison.
    - ajuc 6y ago
      Doesn't seem to be that hard. On abortion it would be 1 if you're in favor of total ban and 0 if you're in favor of no regulation whatsoever. On free healthcare it would be 0 if you want no state involvement whatsoever and 1 if you want free tax-payed healthcare for every citizen. Etc. It doesn't even matter which way the 0 and 1 are.
      - 082349872349872 6y ago
        With enough issues, no one will be at the average, by the curse of dimensionality. On the other hand, making it obvious that we're all nonconformists (à la https://www.abelard.org/e-f-russell.php https://www.abelard.org/e-f-russell.php And Then There Were None?) might be an improvement.
- uniqueid 6y ago
  Not any measure that makes sense to me, and I've lived through a few decades now. I don't even think America represented such a menagerie of viewpoints in the late '60s.
  - altcognito 6y ago
    That’s what I’m wondering. The internet has sharpened so many viewpoints (not in a good way) . My question is sincere and curious. There might be lots of pressure to push opinions in one direction or another but that’s not conformism, quite the opposite.
    - tetrometal 6y ago
      I think a lot of people are rightly sensing a shrinking of the Overton window[0]. For example, I think the following is a perfectly reasonable position to hold: "It would be a remarkable happenstance if, in a perfectly free society, men and women were found in equal proportion in every industry. Indeed, the default expectation should be that there will be variability in this regard." Saying that in today's environment with my name attached would get me fired, so I keep my mouth shut. A perfectly reasonable position, and I cannot speak it for fear of losing the ability to care for my family. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window
    - mcguire 6y ago
      It's probably a reference to http://paulgraham.com/conformism.html http://paulgraham.com/conformism.html.
pjc50 6y ago
What do you mean by "Cancel culture" here and what specifically do you think might apply to Sowell?
- cultus 6y ago
  It's just an excuse to complain about how bigotry is becoming less socially acceptable.
- cma 6y ago
  Be charitable, he could be talking about the Dixie Chicks or anchors that were fired for questioning the Iraq war. Or for the biggest example of modern cancel culture, Kaepernick's firing after targeting by the president.
  - pjc50 6y ago
    Well exactly - it's a phrase that seems to cover so many different situations it's meaningless without further qualification.
    - SantalBlush 6y ago
      I think it’s a formula for poisoning the well. First, make vague complaints about conformism and “cancel culture.” Then, anyone who disagrees with you from that point must clearly be a conformist who approves of cancel culture.
      - harshreality 6y ago
        Vague? First of all, we can omit anything dealing with real sexual harassment, abuse, or obvious discrimination by people in power; although I think the social witch hunt phenomenon of things like #metoo is problematic, I'm not going to defend any of the people caught up in that kind of thing. So I think it's fair to exclude people like Lawrence Krauss, Louis CK, and definitely people like Harvey Weinstein. That leaves us with people cancelled for ideological reasons because of things they've said or written, because that ideology is felt to have a chilling effect on anyone interacting with them. James Watson: cancelled Tim Hunt: cancelled for sexist joke Lawrence Summers: cancelled Bret Weinstein: cancelled (from Evergreen, at least) Erika Christakis: quasi-cancelled (left Yale voluntarily a year after the Halloween incident). J. K. Rowling: ongoing attempted cancellation[1] due to being a trans-exclusionary radical feminist (TERF), despite the fact that she didn't seem to be exclusionary at all, and definitely nothing at all like Camille Paglia who is more definitively a TERF. Among numerous others. Including that PR rep who was fired within the span of her plane trip to Africa after making a racial joke about HIV on her personal twitter account. That's to say nothing of people who would be cancelled if today's culture were transported back in time. Starting with William Shockley, and extending to a large number of notable historical figures. [1] For some tweets and later elaborated on in a blog post, all detailed here: https://www.glamour.com/story/a-complete-breakdown-of-the-jk-rowling-transgender-comments-controversy https://www.glamour.com/story/a-complete-breakdown-of-the-jk... . Basically, her crime seems to be an attempt to frame her experience and sexuality around her biological gender.
Causality1 6y ago
Indeed. I cross a lot of party lines with my beliefs and it's almost a case of diglossia with the way I have to phrase arguments towards the group I'm talking to. You can have one central idea but the way you have to word it makes it sound repulsive to the counterpart of the group you're addressing.

gerland 6y ago

Oh, look. You got downvoted for stating an opinion. Gee, how could this happen? There definitely is no bias here, no sir.

altcognito 6y ago

What objective measure of conformism are you using?

ajuc 6y ago
Sum of squares of the differences on all important issues between you and the average? So basically the same formula as variance in probability theory.
- altcognito 6y ago
  Well I mean at that level what counts as a difference and what’s the measure of that distance. I like that this is an attempt to define it even if is isn’t op and we do t actually have any actual numbers, past or present for comparison.
  - ajuc 6y ago
    Doesn't seem to be that hard. On abortion it would be 1 if you're in favor of total ban and 0 if you're in favor of no regulation whatsoever. On free healthcare it would be 0 if you want no state involvement whatsoever and 1 if you want free tax-payed healthcare for every citizen. Etc. It doesn't even matter which way the 0 and 1 are.
    - 082349872349872 6y ago
      With enough issues, no one will be at the average, by the curse of dimensionality. On the other hand, making it obvious that we're all nonconformists (à la https://www.abelard.org/e-f-russell.php https://www.abelard.org/e-f-russell.php And Then There Were None?) might be an improvement.
uniqueid 6y ago
Not any measure that makes sense to me, and I've lived through a few decades now. I don't even think America represented such a menagerie of viewpoints in the late '60s.
- altcognito 6y ago
  That’s what I’m wondering. The internet has sharpened so many viewpoints (not in a good way) . My question is sincere and curious. There might be lots of pressure to push opinions in one direction or another but that’s not conformism, quite the opposite.
  - tetrometal 6y ago
    I think a lot of people are rightly sensing a shrinking of the Overton window[0]. For example, I think the following is a perfectly reasonable position to hold: "It would be a remarkable happenstance if, in a perfectly free society, men and women were found in equal proportion in every industry. Indeed, the default expectation should be that there will be variability in this regard." Saying that in today's environment with my name attached would get me fired, so I keep my mouth shut. A perfectly reasonable position, and I cannot speak it for fear of losing the ability to care for my family. [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Overton_window
  - mcguire 6y ago
    It's probably a reference to http://paulgraham.com/conformism.html http://paulgraham.com/conformism.html.

pjc50 6y ago

What do you mean by "Cancel culture" here and what specifically do you think might apply to Sowell?

cultus 6y ago
It's just an excuse to complain about how bigotry is becoming less socially acceptable.
cma 6y ago
Be charitable, he could be talking about the Dixie Chicks or anchors that were fired for questioning the Iraq war. Or for the biggest example of modern cancel culture, Kaepernick's firing after targeting by the president.
- pjc50 6y ago
  Well exactly - it's a phrase that seems to cover so many different situations it's meaningless without further qualification.
  - SantalBlush 6y ago
    I think it’s a formula for poisoning the well. First, make vague complaints about conformism and “cancel culture.” Then, anyone who disagrees with you from that point must clearly be a conformist who approves of cancel culture.
    - harshreality 6y ago
      Vague? First of all, we can omit anything dealing with real sexual harassment, abuse, or obvious discrimination by people in power; although I think the social witch hunt phenomenon of things like #metoo is problematic, I'm not going to defend any of the people caught up in that kind of thing. So I think it's fair to exclude people like Lawrence Krauss, Louis CK, and definitely people like Harvey Weinstein. That leaves us with people cancelled for ideological reasons because of things they've said or written, because that ideology is felt to have a chilling effect on anyone interacting with them. James Watson: cancelled Tim Hunt: cancelled for sexist joke Lawrence Summers: cancelled Bret Weinstein: cancelled (from Evergreen, at least) Erika Christakis: quasi-cancelled (left Yale voluntarily a year after the Halloween incident). J. K. Rowling: ongoing attempted cancellation[1] due to being a trans-exclusionary radical feminist (TERF), despite the fact that she didn't seem to be exclusionary at all, and definitely nothing at all like Camille Paglia who is more definitively a TERF. Among numerous others. Including that PR rep who was fired within the span of her plane trip to Africa after making a racial joke about HIV on her personal twitter account. That's to say nothing of people who would be cancelled if today's culture were transported back in time. Starting with William Shockley, and extending to a large number of notable historical figures. [1] For some tweets and later elaborated on in a blog post, all detailed here: https://www.glamour.com/story/a-complete-breakdown-of-the-jk-rowling-transgender-comments-controversy https://www.glamour.com/story/a-complete-breakdown-of-the-jk... . Basically, her crime seems to be an attempt to frame her experience and sexuality around her biological gender.

Causality1 6y ago

Indeed. I cross a lot of party lines with my beliefs and it's almost a case of diglossia with the way I have to phrase arguments towards the group I'm talking to. You can have one central idea but the way you have to word it makes it sound repulsive to the counterpart of the group you're addressing.