3 ms·
>> The prophetic accuracy of Bradbury’s work is evident in the recent controversy over Joe Rogan’s podcast. > My point is: selecting quality is not "censorship
by tablespoon 5y ago
>> The prophetic accuracy of Bradbury’s work is evident in the recent controversy over Joe Rogan’s podcast.
> My point is: selecting quality is not "censorship" it is mental hygiene. Bad discussions and bad ideas should really be discarded. When you tune out from a creationist, anti-vaxer, flat-earth prophet or global warming denier you are selecting for quality.
I strongly agree, generally. And I'm not a Rogan fan and I don't listen to his podcast. However, it's also important to keep in mind that in some cases it's easy to confuse quality for ideological compatibility. So you may think you're selecting for quality when you're actually selecting for things that just reinforce your beliefs.
As a kind of relevant aside, I think it's also important to distinguish "seeking the ultimate, correct truth" from "making a timely, reasonable decision." Specifically with a lot of COVID stuff, I think a lot of people have gotten hung up the former in ways that undermine the latter, when the latter is actually the more important thing at this moment.