4 ms·
Being wrong is not absolute proof that nobody will follow or agree with these wrong beliefs. Climate scientists, for example, have spent a lot of time arguing i
by UncleMeat 5y ago
Being wrong is not absolute proof that nobody will follow or agree with these wrong beliefs. Climate scientists, for example, have spent a lot of time arguing in public about the merits of climate science and the lies of deniers. That is important work because the deniers do convince some people and denialism causes real harm.
- imgabe 5y agoBeing popular is not absolute proof that ideas are right either. That’s why we need to leave room for the unpopular ideas too.
- krainboltgreene 5y agoHow much room do we leave for phrenology?
- imgabe 5y agoShould we fire anyone who thinks phrenology is real? How about flat earthers? Should they be unable to feed or shelter themselves because they’re wrong about something? Are you right about everything?
- krainboltgreene 5y agoI've already decided you're right, now we just need to find out how much room we leave for these topics.
- imgabe 5y agoThe whole idea of free speech is that there is no “we” who decides what topics are allowed and “how much room” particular topics get. Free speech means it’s free, and people can talk about whatever they want, however much they want. If you don’t like what people are saying, you can use your free speech to explain why your ideas are better.
- krainboltgreene 5y agoOkay so your solution is to give as much room as phrenology wants. If it gets incredibly popular then so be it, let the masses think that certain races are less intelligent due to head sizes. Who could that possibly hurt.
- imgabe 5y agoPhrenology already had its chance, man. Look, the apocalypse didn’t happen. You think you’re smart enough to determine which ideas should be allowed? How do you know you won’t be the Church burning Galileo at the stake? Hint: you don’t know that. That’s why you have some humility. Ultimately ideas that don’t work will fail.
- krainboltgreene 5y agoI love people who haven't read a lick of history. Sure, Phrenology just died out on it's own. You got it.
- imgabe 5y agoEnlighten me. Please do describe the concerted efforts by governments and institutions to ban discussion of phrenology. What was the punishment for unauthorized phrenology lectures? Are you not violating all these anti-phrenology laws right now by even bringing it up?
- krainboltgreene 5y ago> Phrenology was banned in Vienna for a variety of reasons, including the overenthusiasm of Gall's followers, and the treatment of women. https://soundideas.pugetsound.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1014&context=sntemp https://soundideas.pugetsound.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?refere... In fact in places where it wasn't banned it flourished.
- 5y ago
- raxxorraxor 5y agoThat is a fairly bad excuse and exactly why I think that cancel culture, even if exaggerated, is of concern. Because you just admitted the motivation to deny people opportunity to state their opinion and I believe this shouldn't take too much influence in any academic discourse and a lot of protesters disqualify themselves here. That is a tragedy not because the targets are indeed often wrong, but because it has a negative impact on when student activism is required and can have positive influences as it so often had in the past. I can be dismissed with references to incidence like those where people just were shouted down.