5 ms·

It is an example of intellectual diversity even though nazis are monsters but I think the overarching point of the article is that despite the fact that monster

It is an example of intellectual diversity even though nazis are monsters but I think the overarching point of the article is that despite the fact that monsters exist intellectual diversity is good.

ATsch 6y ago
Curious, how the conclusion of the "intellectual diversity" argument is always that we should tolerate nazis more and never anything else, really makes you think. (Cue the "I don't support nazis I just think that for the good of mankind, unfortunately, we need to do everything we can to support nazis, incidentally of course" script.)
- ruslanbogan 6y ago
  I don't think we should tolerate nazis more, there's a wide range of intellectual diversity out there the problem is that people like you think anyone who slightly disagrees with you on anything must be a nazi. Unfortunately intellectual diversity includes people who think that way
  - locopati 6y ago
    I'm pretty sure we can stick to "there are actual people who support Nazi ideology" without turning it into "anyone who slightly disagrees with you." What is an intellectual exercise for some is a matter of existence and survival for others.
bawolff 6y ago
If that's the point of the article, then its a pretty terribly argued article. If the author wants to argue that we have less intellectual diversity now and its bad, finding some examples of ideologies that don't want to mass murder specific ethnic groups would go a long way to making the argument convincing. [And i'm starting from a place where i believe intellectual diversity is a good thing, although i think we have more now than we did in the past. Its not like i disagree with the author on that point, I just don't think s/he actually cares about intellectual diversity and instead just likes nazis. ]
- ATsch 6y ago
  Indeed, there's no lack of good faith arguments for what you could call "intellectual diversity". For example, Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky talk at length about how the way our media is interlinked with corporations and governments steers the discourse toward a narrow range of ideas approved by those groups in their book "Manufacturing Consent". Mark Fisher decries a climate in which most people consider markets as the only possible solution for all problems in "Capitalist Realism". However, because these authors can just be upfront about what their beliefs are, they aren't forced to argue for vague concepts like "intellectual diversity" and can instead be specific about the type of restrictions that are occurring and in the case of Herman and Chomsky even track them with real numbers, making for a much better argument.

It is an example of intellectual diversity even though nazis are monsters but I think the overarching point of the article is that despite the fact that monsters exist intellectual diversity is good.

ATsch 6y ago

Curious, how the conclusion of the "intellectual diversity" argument is always that we should tolerate nazis more and never anything else, really makes you think. (Cue the "I don't support nazis I just think that for the good of mankind, unfortunately, we need to do everything we can to support nazis, incidentally of course" script.)

ruslanbogan 6y ago
I don't think we should tolerate nazis more, there's a wide range of intellectual diversity out there the problem is that people like you think anyone who slightly disagrees with you on anything must be a nazi. Unfortunately intellectual diversity includes people who think that way
- locopati 6y ago
  I'm pretty sure we can stick to "there are actual people who support Nazi ideology" without turning it into "anyone who slightly disagrees with you." What is an intellectual exercise for some is a matter of existence and survival for others.

bawolff 6y ago

If that's the point of the article, then its a pretty terribly argued article. If the author wants to argue that we have less intellectual diversity now and its bad, finding some examples of ideologies that don't want to mass murder specific ethnic groups would go a long way to making the argument convincing. [And i'm starting from a place where i believe intellectual diversity is a good thing, although i think we have more now than we did in the past. Its not like i disagree with the author on that point, I just don't think s/he actually cares about intellectual diversity and instead just likes nazis. ]

ATsch 6y ago
Indeed, there's no lack of good faith arguments for what you could call "intellectual diversity". For example, Edward Herman and Noam Chomsky talk at length about how the way our media is interlinked with corporations and governments steers the discourse toward a narrow range of ideas approved by those groups in their book "Manufacturing Consent". Mark Fisher decries a climate in which most people consider markets as the only possible solution for all problems in "Capitalist Realism". However, because these authors can just be upfront about what their beliefs are, they aren't forced to argue for vague concepts like "intellectual diversity" and can instead be specific about the type of restrictions that are occurring and in the case of Herman and Chomsky even track them with real numbers, making for a much better argument.