4 ms·
we should definitely shout down anyone who says it, though!
by mylons 6y ago
we should definitely shout down anyone who says it, though!
- VBprogrammer 6y agoWhen someone's reasons for saying it are simply because it aligns with their own prejudices, shouting it down is reasonable.
- arminiusreturns 6y agoAnd you presume to know peoples reasons for saying things? Perhaps you are the prejudiced one.
- silicon2401 6y agoThat's literally the ad hominem fallacy. We should investigate the claim on its own merits, not the merits of whoever is making the claim
- VBprogrammer 6y agoUh-huh, lets have a polite conversation sprinkled with some Latin. Mean while racists are empowered to attach Asian Americans in the street because they "created the virus".
- mylons 6y agolet's just turn our brains off because there might be racism around
- benmmurphy 6y agoThe premise should be up for debate but we shouldn't accept the implication that because a lab in China leaked the virus it is moral to attack Chinese looking people in the street. You are effectively accepting the racist's reasoning if you ignore the implication and devote your energy to attacking their premise. I see this over and over again. Someone says A can't be true when A is a statement of fact because a group will make the argument A => B where B is something they find morally repugnant. When it comes to statements of fact you are much better arguing over A => B than hoping facts about the world conveniently line up with your moral conclusions.
- bscvbscv 6y agoWhoa, I found someone who actually believes in the "racists attacking asians because they created the virus" narrative. Holy shit. Black people are attacking asians. You say that's because of this idea that Asians created the virus. Do you have any actual evidence of their motivations?
- Nemrod67 6y agoHyperbole isnt helping anything
- tzs 6y agoIt is ad hominem but not ad hominem fallacy. Wikipedia gives a good summary [1] of when ad hominem is not a fallacy: > Valid ad hominem arguments occur in informal logic, where the person making the argument relies on arguments from authority such as testimony, expertise, or on a selective presentation of information supporting the position they are advocating. In this case, counter-arguments may be made that the target is dishonest, lacks the claimed expertise, or has a conflict of interest. For example, if someone tells you that hydroxychloroquinea will cure COVID and cites a doctor, it is an ad hominem not but not a fallacy to counter that the same doctor also says that infertility, impotence, cysts, and various other reproductive medical problems are caused by witches and demons that have sex with people in the dreamworld, where they also gather sperm from people and use it on other people to produce more demons. (And yes, there really is a doctor who says all that). It's not a fallacy because it is not offered to refute the claim that hydroxychloroquine cures COVID--it is offered to show that the person making the claim is not competent to make the claim. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem
- HPsquared 6y agoHow do you determine a person's reasons for saying something, and how can you tell what a person's prejudices are?
- VBprogrammer 6y agoPresenting the idea of laboratory escape as a remote but possible scenario is perfectly reasonable. Presenting it as a fact, without backing it up with evidence or subtly is a good indication that they are speaking from a place of prejudice.
- mylons 6y agoit must be nice to understand everyone's intentions all the time
- kaliali 6y agoSHOUT DOWN ANYONE WHO WONT FOLLOW THE NARRATIVE
- Rochus 6y ago“If we are at the point where all science is politicized and no one cares about truth and only being politically correct,” he [Petrovsky] says, “we may as well give up and shut down and stop doing science.”
- kgwxd 6y agoResearchers should be discussing it. Until conclusive evidence is found, the only reason to post it on social media is to add fuel to the conspiracy fire, a fire that's inspiring people to kill people that couldn't possibly have anything to do with the origin of the virus.
- adamrezich 6y agowho has killed someone because of a belief related to any of this?
- mylons 6y agomaybe Facebook/Twitter/Youtube/Other multi-billion dollar entities should censor their platforms and stop inciting violence algorithmically? why do I have to self censor because I'm smart enough to consider this with a beginner's mind, and not a bigot's?
- kgwxd 6y agoSame reason you don't post links on how to build a bomb to twitter. Post it on demolition professional forums, cool. Talk about it with you demolition expert friends, cool. Show your mentally unstable neighbor how to make one with kitchen supplies, not cool.
- dang 6y agoPlease don't take HN threads into flamewar. It's not what this site is for. If you wouldn't mind reviewing https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and sticking to the rules when posting here, we'd be grateful. They include: "Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive."