3 ms·

This is really more of a science-religion issue than a science-science one. It is more akin to Galileo being tried for heresy for claiming that the sun is the c

by swebs 5y ago

This is really more of a science-religion issue than a science-science one. It is more akin to Galileo being tried for heresy for claiming that the sun is the center of the solar system. Though in this case the religion is progressivism. And the keystone of progressive dogma is that "All groups are born completely equal and any achievement difference is the result of racism by white people or sexism by men." And if it could be proven scientifically that this is not the case (which it has been [1]) then the whole ideology collapses. If you've ever tried to convince someone to disregard a deeply held religious belief, you know how much of an uphill battle it can be. And it can be downright impossible for the more zealous, especially if they believe they're constantly battling some sort of "other" (mostly theoretical Nazis). It doesn't look like things will be getting better any time soon. In fact, with the increase of deplatforming and ideology-driven power mods on social media sites like Reddit, it seems like we're moving into a sort of digital dark age. [1] https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jensen30years.pdf https://www1.udel.edu/educ/gottfredson/30years/Rushton-Jense...

Applejinx 5y ago
It's understandable for people to collectively react negatively to genocidal tropes getting pushed once more with great enthusiasm. This shit never goes away, and Nazis were not in the least theoretical: one could say what made Nazis Nazis was a game plan, one that's very specific. Also, the keystone of progressive dogma is that there is VALUE in the wellbeing of all types of people, contrasting with conservative dogma that hierarchy is both inevitable and deeply moral: that there are and will always be underpeople, which must be kept in their place. Progressive dogma is more akin to your basic Ratatouille trope: that the good idea, the new concept, the innovation can come from ANYWHERE. I think that's a defensible position, and it puts a completely different spin on the idea of not starving the underpeople to death or killing them outright.
- swebs 5y ago
  >progressive dogma ... contrasting with conservative dogma That's a false dichotomy and really the core of my complaint. Instead of dogma, we should be striving towards facts based on empirical evidence. Science.
  - Applejinx 5y ago
    It's far from a false dichotomy. Typically, part of the assumption that the world must be broken down into hierarchical power structures and the subhuman valueless people must be suppressed, is an insistence that empirical evidence has established these things as facts. Further investigation (for instance, Shaun's video on 'The Bell Curve') reveals this evidence is faked. Some of us have had our patience with this sort of thing eroded, over time. You cannot simply assert you have the evidence, you have the facts, any other interpretation is wrong, and therefore you automatically win. That ain't gonna fly, except among a subset of HN commenters and system-participants. And their brigading only discourages the participation of those who still think all this is about exchange of ideas. In my experience 'we define the facts, the evidence, and use systemic means to stifle anybody who gets in the way' does not enhance the free exchange of ideas.

by swebs 5y ago

Applejinx 5y ago

It's understandable for people to collectively react negatively to genocidal tropes getting pushed once more with great enthusiasm. This shit never goes away, and Nazis were not in the least theoretical: one could say what made Nazis Nazis was a game plan, one that's very specific. Also, the keystone of progressive dogma is that there is VALUE in the wellbeing of all types of people, contrasting with conservative dogma that hierarchy is both inevitable and deeply moral: that there are and will always be underpeople, which must be kept in their place. Progressive dogma is more akin to your basic Ratatouille trope: that the good idea, the new concept, the innovation can come from ANYWHERE. I think that's a defensible position, and it puts a completely different spin on the idea of not starving the underpeople to death or killing them outright.

swebs 5y ago
>progressive dogma ... contrasting with conservative dogma That's a false dichotomy and really the core of my complaint. Instead of dogma, we should be striving towards facts based on empirical evidence. Science.
- Applejinx 5y ago
  It's far from a false dichotomy. Typically, part of the assumption that the world must be broken down into hierarchical power structures and the subhuman valueless people must be suppressed, is an insistence that empirical evidence has established these things as facts. Further investigation (for instance, Shaun's video on 'The Bell Curve') reveals this evidence is faked. Some of us have had our patience with this sort of thing eroded, over time. You cannot simply assert you have the evidence, you have the facts, any other interpretation is wrong, and therefore you automatically win. That ain't gonna fly, except among a subset of HN commenters and system-participants. And their brigading only discourages the participation of those who still think all this is about exchange of ideas. In my experience 'we define the facts, the evidence, and use systemic means to stifle anybody who gets in the way' does not enhance the free exchange of ideas.