3 ms·
Shouldn't that make us more sympathetic to the issue? In all the fights over those issues it was a constant among the left that free discussion is vital. Was th
by pochamago 6y ago
Shouldn't that make us more sympathetic to the issue? In all the fights over those issues it was a constant among the left that free discussion is vital. Was that really just an attractive political stance, held only until it was no longer useful? I don't want to believe that, I have to believe that people were sincere and we can return to it as a universal principle.
- wvenable 6y agoIt's basic tolerance of intolerance. We want to be tolerant in all things -- be sympathetic -- but the more you are tolerance of intolerance the less tolerance there is in the world. It's a delicate balance and not one that is so black and white.
- pochamago 6y agoTo be honest, I've always felt like this was an unproved assertion. Popper made it sound very good, but what attempts to show that it's actually true have been made?
- josephg 6y agoSure; sometimes its complicated. But it seems pretty simple here. The article in question[1] makes a liberal appeal to care about good art, and care less about the artist. It isn't overtly racist or sexist. It isn't a work of intolerance that we need to steel ourselves to be intolerant over in turn. Its a pretty middle of the road, classically liberal opinion piece that 15 years ago would have been entirely uncontroversial and boring. Deplatforming someone over this isn't "bravely standing up to intolerance". Deplatforming the author is just simple anti-intellectual intolerance of the diversity of ideas that (used to) make the academy so great. [1] https://arcdigital.media/self-censorship-in-the-academy-524186bacafd https://arcdigital.media/self-censorship-in-the-academy-5241...