3 ms·
They tried to cancel them for being considerers of heretical thoughts. In every time period of the past there have been things which were taboo to discuss, whi
by cubefox 3y ago
They tried to cancel them for being considerers of heretical thoughts.
In every time period of the past there have been things which were taboo to discuss, which were outside the Overton window. There is no reason to believe our times are different in this regard. That's why intellectually honest people should engage by engaging with arguments themselves, whatever they may be, not by engaging in cancellation and character assassination.
- staticman2 3y agoI don't know enough about those two bloggers to comment in a fair manner, but I'll just say I don't think the distinction between arguments and character assassinations is as clear as you are drawing it. If I think people born on a tuesday have no souls based on deductive reasoning, and invite likeminded folks to spread the word, is that an argument or a character assassination? I would say the latter, someone else might say the former.
- throw10920 3y ago> I don't think the distinction between arguments and character assassinations is as clear as you are drawing it. It's certainly very clear in this case that the NYT conducted a character assassination of Scott Alexander, so I don't know why you're making this argument.