4 ms·
An alternative hypothesis is that C1 and C3, and to a lesser extent C2, are essentially untenable positions that are only ever espoused in bad-faith by trolls a
by feoren 3y ago
An alternative hypothesis is that C1 and C3, and to a lesser extent C2, are essentially untenable positions that are only ever espoused in bad-faith by trolls and people with ulterior motives. Nate Silver says they seem "slightly spicier", to him, but perhaps what he's really detecting is that they are simply not evidence-based positions that anyone debates in good-faith. The idea that C1 and C3 are simply untenable positions, never held in good faith, certainly resonates with me; C2 less so, but I could understand why people think that. Meanwhile, L1 through L3 do not have that flavor at all; they sound like arguments that could actually be debated with facts.
If that were true, we have a rather simpler story: about 60% to 70% of people would happily invite debate about whatever, as long as it is in good faith. Liberals essentially do not believe C1 through C3 are good-faith arguments, while conservatives do. Even this 60% to 70% number is a bit lower than I'd like to see, but perhaps 30% of people don't think Universities should play the role of public forum at all?
I just don't think you can draw strong conclusions from this without actually analyzing the content of C1 - C3 and L1 - L3, and my intuition about them suggests a very different interpretation. C1 and C3 both have a strong flavor of a certain group of people essentially having no right to exist, or at least deserving of a lesser existence. Asking transgender people to debate whether or not they have a mental disorder, in the name of free speech, is essentially stating that they constantly must argue for their right to exist. Rejecting C1 as a valid argument is essentially stating that transgender people do have an unequivocal right to exist, and do not need to constantly argue for their own existence until the end of time. Nate Silver does not even mention the possibility that the Cs are inherently more flawed positions than the Ls, and that is a mistake.