4 ms·
By your logic, would Ignaz Semmelweis, Giordano Bruno, or Nicolaus Copernicus be allowed on a mainstream platform today? And does that even matter to you? Thei
by nomilk 5y ago
By your logic, would Ignaz Semmelweis, Giordano Bruno, or Nicolaus Copernicus be allowed on a mainstream platform today? And does that even matter to you?
Their ideas were so shocking they weren't only banned, but were made pariahs of, thrown into asylums, and burned.
The best we can do is hear different ideas with an open mind, and use our logic and discernment to come to our own judgements.
Since the quality of judgement differs greatly from person to person, it's dangerous to allow your flow of information to be filtered by corporate or governmental pressures; let alone by any single segment of society.
- lemmsjid 5y agoI think if you review the biographies of those three individuals, you will find that the stories of their persecutions are a lot more complex than that they were attacked for their novel ideas (though that is certainly an aspect). In most cases it wasn't their scientific ideas that were shocking or banned, but their political affiliations or religious stances. I think all three would have a platform today, because they provided evidence based and extensively reasoned positions. I see Rogan in rather the opposite way: he is contributing noise to the larger discussion by intentionally amplifying particular voices, without regard for whether or not they are in good faith, because they resonate with him or his perception of his audience. If Rogan were finding and amplifying voices that had evidence based arguments that contributed to overall understanding, I would be much more positively inclined. Though all that said, I'm against deplatforming him.
- snotrockets 5y agoI don’t think he has the risk of being deplatformed. At worst he stands to gain less money out of his show. It’s the business risk he took with being risqué, and as any risk, he may take a fall.
- jart 5y agoNicolaus Copernicus: Shock Jock