5 ms·

So I guess you’re the arbiter of what people should and should not care about?

by awb 5y ago

logicalmonster 5y ago
Not exactly. All individuals are always entitled to personal opinions, even when those opinions are dumb and held for dumb reasons. And unlike the governments of the world that lockup people for "wrong" opinions or the social media firms that employ "fact checkers" to justify whatever censorship they want or the children on Twitter that try to bully or silence people into submission, I advocate absolutely no censorship of any kind. I'm simply an individual trying to learn and reason through some of these issues because I think it's very important both to me and the world. 1) Given the existence of cancel culture, as somebody who holds unorthodox views, I think others' bad ideas represent a large threat to my well-being so it's reasonable for me to care deeply about how people arrive at their conclusions based on what information they take in and process. 2) There are indeed serious and important issues in the world: and solving one of them the wrong way would lead to really bad outcomes. The situation we have right now where one of least self-aware groups of people on the planet (journalists) are able to use emotional manipulation to influence the world into taking the complicated risk-management decision that they feel is best is very concerning to me.
- awb 5y ago
  > others' bad ideas represent a large threat to my well-being I’m sorry you feel threatened by other people’s ideas. > There are indeed serious and important issues in the world: and solving one of them the wrong way would lead to really bad outcomes That sounds right to me about any important decision, at the individual or the global level. > one of least self-aware groups of people on the planet (journalists) That doesn’t sound like a fair or even knowable criticism to me, just bashing an entire profession. At a fundamental level, the collection and distribution of information is important for decision making, so there’s probably an advantage for groups that can share information effectively. I personally would love access to quality, well sourced information. But everyone is biased. If you started writing articles, I don’t think it would be as easy to remove your personal bias as you might think. It’s easier than ever to be an independent journalist with a substack account, or a self-hosted WordPress blog, so you’re of course free to try and improve upon what we currently have.

So I guess you’re the arbiter of what people should and should not care about?

by awb 5y ago

So I guess you’re the arbiter of what people should and should not care about?

Not exactly. All individuals are always entitled to personal opinions, even when those opinions are dumb and held for dumb reasons. And unlike the governments of the world that lockup people for "wrong" opinions or the social media firms that employ "fact checkers" to justify whatever censorship they want or the children on Twitter that try to bully or silence people into submission, I advocate absolutely no censorship of any kind. I'm simply an individual trying to learn and reason through some of these issues because I think it's very important both to me and the world. 1) Given the existence of cancel culture, as somebody who holds unorthodox views, I think others' bad ideas represent a large threat to my well-being so it's reasonable for me to care deeply about how people arrive at their conclusions based on what information they take in and process. 2) There are indeed serious and important issues in the world: and solving one of them the wrong way would lead to really bad outcomes. The situation we have right now where one of least self-aware groups of people on the planet (journalists) are able to use emotional manipulation to influence the world into taking the complicated risk-management decision that they feel is best is very concerning to me.

awb 5y ago
> others' bad ideas represent a large threat to my well-being I’m sorry you feel threatened by other people’s ideas. > There are indeed serious and important issues in the world: and solving one of them the wrong way would lead to really bad outcomes That sounds right to me about any important decision, at the individual or the global level. > one of least self-aware groups of people on the planet (journalists) That doesn’t sound like a fair or even knowable criticism to me, just bashing an entire profession. At a fundamental level, the collection and distribution of information is important for decision making, so there’s probably an advantage for groups that can share information effectively. I personally would love access to quality, well sourced information. But everyone is biased. If you started writing articles, I don’t think it would be as easy to remove your personal bias as you might think. It’s easier than ever to be an independent journalist with a substack account, or a self-hosted WordPress blog, so you’re of course free to try and improve upon what we currently have.