6 ms·

I wonder how these comparisons manage to take hold and spread. Being balanced doesn't mean being somewhere in the middle between thinking the Earth is flat and

by croon 6y ago

I wonder how these comparisons manage to take hold and spread. Being balanced doesn't mean being somewhere in the middle between thinking the Earth is flat and thinking the Earth is spherical. It's neither, but it's certainly closer to one of them. What truths do you suggest these "identity-politics liberals" are ignoring? I also can't help but notice the incredible irony in repudiating identity politics and post-modernism while simultaneously lumping them all into one group.

da39a3ee 6y ago
> What truths do you suggest these "identity-politics liberals" are ignoring? Hi, I'm happy to debate this sensibly. Two major areas in which the identity politics movement is inconsistent with how a scientific rationalist society should behave are these: 1. The movement to deny that biological sex is an overwhelmingly important factor shaping human biology, just as it shapes the biology of other mammals. See https://quillette.com/2018/11/30/the-new-evolution-deniers/ https://quillette.com/2018/11/30/the-new-evolution-deniers/ https://quillette.com/2020/07/30/think-cancel-culture-doesnt-exist-my-own-lived-experience-says-otherwise/ https://quillette.com/2020/07/30/think-cancel-culture-doesnt... 2. Deplatforming people with reasonable, rational viewpoints. Richard Dawkins is an example. Look at the most recent deplatforming by a university historical society that has recently become identity-politics oriented (The Hist at Trinity College Dublin). They deplatformed him because "we value our members comfort above all else". So, that is an example of what I said, and that which you took exception to: the identity politics movement being less interested in truth than other things (here "comfort").
- croon 6y ago
  https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Quillette https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Quillette Dawkins wasn't "deplatformed" for his legitimate views, but for islamophobia, which is completely legitimate. > In 2013, Dawkins came under fire for a series of statements regarding Islam that seemed to blur the line between reason-based resistance to dogma and xenophobic prejudice. He views Islam as the "greatest force for evil in the world today"[35][36] and stated that "All the world's Muslims have fewer Nobel Prizes than Trinity College, Cambridge,"[37].
  - da39a3ee 6y ago
    Do you not think that criticizing a religion is an acceptable thing for someone (e.g. an academic) to do? Indeed, that it would be a terrible thing if our academics were not free to criticize cultural movements such as religions? He wasn't speaking at a kindergarten; he was speaking at a university society that exists to platform intellectual debate.
    - croon 6y ago
      Yes, I remember when he did that with Christianity. I'm agnostic and I have his old books in my bookcase. He wasn't "criticizing" Islam, he was fearmongering. Then he started cozying up with evangelists as long as they hated "post-modernists" enough. He has (previously) had a lot of good things to say, and at some point he abandoned his ideals in favor of politics, and just became another Jordan Peterson crank.
      - da39a3ee 6y ago
        Yes, I'm a biologist, and I also read all his old books when I was younger. I can see why you might think that he's only interested in politics based on media coverage, but it actually isn't true: I went to listen to him speak in Berkeley 3 years ago, and it was nearly all about the old stuff: gene-level selection, kin selection, etc. Two years later he was due to come again at the invitation of the same radio station, but his invitation was canceled, due to the influence of "progressives". > abandoned his ideals I certainly wouldn't say that about him! What makes you think so? > Then he started cozying up with evangelists as long as they hated "post-modernists" enough. Could you tell me what you're referring to there? I agree he hates post-modernism.
        croon 6y ago
        https://web.archive.org/web/20190929045043/https:/twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/1178170072537264129 https://web.archive.org/web/20190929045043/https:/twitter.co... https://web.archive.org/web/20190929094120if_/https://twitter.com/saeen90_/status/1178242652468400128 https://web.archive.org/web/20190929094120if_/https://twitte... But I don't really care about his views on biological genders, but what relevant point did he have when writing this message down in the blog post?: https://skepchick.org/2011/07/the-privilege-delusion/ https://skepchick.org/2011/07/the-privilege-delusion/ He's become a political agitator, and increasingly rarely a scientist. This is not meant to say "stick to science", but if he wants to be political, I'm going to criticize is politics, because they suck and he does deserve scorn for them. Maybe as an old guy don't tell a woman that her experience is wrong. I don't think that this is a radical "post-modernist" idea.

by croon 6y ago

da39a3ee 6y ago

> What truths do you suggest these "identity-politics liberals" are ignoring? Hi, I'm happy to debate this sensibly. Two major areas in which the identity politics movement is inconsistent with how a scientific rationalist society should behave are these: 1. The movement to deny that biological sex is an overwhelmingly important factor shaping human biology, just as it shapes the biology of other mammals. See https://quillette.com/2018/11/30/the-new-evolution-deniers/ https://quillette.com/2018/11/30/the-new-evolution-deniers/ https://quillette.com/2020/07/30/think-cancel-culture-doesnt-exist-my-own-lived-experience-says-otherwise/ https://quillette.com/2020/07/30/think-cancel-culture-doesnt... 2. Deplatforming people with reasonable, rational viewpoints. Richard Dawkins is an example. Look at the most recent deplatforming by a university historical society that has recently become identity-politics oriented (The Hist at Trinity College Dublin). They deplatformed him because "we value our members comfort above all else". So, that is an example of what I said, and that which you took exception to: the identity politics movement being less interested in truth than other things (here "comfort").

croon 6y ago
https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Quillette https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Quillette Dawkins wasn't "deplatformed" for his legitimate views, but for islamophobia, which is completely legitimate. > In 2013, Dawkins came under fire for a series of statements regarding Islam that seemed to blur the line between reason-based resistance to dogma and xenophobic prejudice. He views Islam as the "greatest force for evil in the world today"[35][36] and stated that "All the world's Muslims have fewer Nobel Prizes than Trinity College, Cambridge,"[37].
- da39a3ee 6y ago
  Do you not think that criticizing a religion is an acceptable thing for someone (e.g. an academic) to do? Indeed, that it would be a terrible thing if our academics were not free to criticize cultural movements such as religions? He wasn't speaking at a kindergarten; he was speaking at a university society that exists to platform intellectual debate.
  - croon 6y ago
    Yes, I remember when he did that with Christianity. I'm agnostic and I have his old books in my bookcase. He wasn't "criticizing" Islam, he was fearmongering. Then he started cozying up with evangelists as long as they hated "post-modernists" enough. He has (previously) had a lot of good things to say, and at some point he abandoned his ideals in favor of politics, and just became another Jordan Peterson crank.
    - da39a3ee 6y ago
      Yes, I'm a biologist, and I also read all his old books when I was younger. I can see why you might think that he's only interested in politics based on media coverage, but it actually isn't true: I went to listen to him speak in Berkeley 3 years ago, and it was nearly all about the old stuff: gene-level selection, kin selection, etc. Two years later he was due to come again at the invitation of the same radio station, but his invitation was canceled, due to the influence of "progressives". > abandoned his ideals I certainly wouldn't say that about him! What makes you think so? > Then he started cozying up with evangelists as long as they hated "post-modernists" enough. Could you tell me what you're referring to there? I agree he hates post-modernism.
      - croon 6y ago
        https://web.archive.org/web/20190929045043/https:/twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/1178170072537264129 https://web.archive.org/web/20190929045043/https:/twitter.co... https://web.archive.org/web/20190929094120if_/https://twitter.com/saeen90_/status/1178242652468400128 https://web.archive.org/web/20190929094120if_/https://twitte... But I don't really care about his views on biological genders, but what relevant point did he have when writing this message down in the blog post?: https://skepchick.org/2011/07/the-privilege-delusion/ https://skepchick.org/2011/07/the-privilege-delusion/ He's become a political agitator, and increasingly rarely a scientist. This is not meant to say "stick to science", but if he wants to be political, I'm going to criticize is politics, because they suck and he does deserve scorn for them. Maybe as an old guy don't tell a woman that her experience is wrong. I don't think that this is a radical "post-modernist" idea.