3 ms·

Jonathan Haidt has also been critiqued by his peers [1] for looking at the data with a foregone conclusion instead of getting his conclusion from the data. He's

Jonathan Haidt has also been critiqued by his peers [1] for looking at the data with a foregone conclusion instead of getting his conclusion from the data. He's another one of those moral panic peddlers and should not be trusted as a reliable source. [2] 1. https://www.youtube.com/live/Ewxe4pWOH-I https://www.youtube.com/live/Ewxe4pWOH-I 2. https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1647639025879064579.html https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1647639025879064579.html

WorkerBee28474 2y ago
You seem to dismiss anyone who claims a "moral panic" while relying on a source that claims multiple moral panics as the issue, such as "the fact that we're living in a late stage capitalist hellscape ... [without a] social safety net...as climate change cooks the world". Furthermore, your backup includes 'X can't be caused by Y because X happened before Y existed'. This ignores that possibility that X can be caused by Y and also caused by something else that existed before Y.
- DHPersonal 2y ago
  Climate change is real, so it’s not a moral panic. I am not interested in sharing sources about this with you in 2024, because this has already been debated to death in the years prior. If you are not convinced of its existence, then that’s more your concern than mine. Late stage capitalism’s reference is a touchy subject and probably hyperbole in most cases, but it is also a specific reference and does not require the complete abandonment of capitalism to repair the problems. Referring to it does not necessarily equate to a moral panic in my definition of the terms. I do not ignore the possibility you cite; I find the reasoning of it existing prior far more convincing.
blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
Some things don’t need data for us to take action. This is one of them. You can ignore the problem if it isn’t a big thing for you, but to many adults the reality of the anxious generation is right in front of them. Waiting for drawn out debates is not acceptable to them, and these actions have almost no downsides.
- DHPersonal 2y ago
  Picking the first offered action to a potential problem is a moral panic. Without intending it, one can potentially introduce different long-term negative effects. I am a parent of three and am fully aware of the anxieties of parenthood. I once held a similar position of anxiety about this issue until someone wrote a response to me that was very similar to my own in this thread. I’m trying to share something similar with others: to inform those concerned that banning is not necessarily the only or best option.

WorkerBee28474 2y ago

You seem to dismiss anyone who claims a "moral panic" while relying on a source that claims multiple moral panics as the issue, such as "the fact that we're living in a late stage capitalist hellscape ... [without a] social safety net...as climate change cooks the world". Furthermore, your backup includes 'X can't be caused by Y because X happened before Y existed'. This ignores that possibility that X can be caused by Y and also caused by something else that existed before Y.

DHPersonal 2y ago
Climate change is real, so it’s not a moral panic. I am not interested in sharing sources about this with you in 2024, because this has already been debated to death in the years prior. If you are not convinced of its existence, then that’s more your concern than mine. Late stage capitalism’s reference is a touchy subject and probably hyperbole in most cases, but it is also a specific reference and does not require the complete abandonment of capitalism to repair the problems. Referring to it does not necessarily equate to a moral panic in my definition of the terms. I do not ignore the possibility you cite; I find the reasoning of it existing prior far more convincing.

blackeyeblitzar 2y ago

Some things don’t need data for us to take action. This is one of them. You can ignore the problem if it isn’t a big thing for you, but to many adults the reality of the anxious generation is right in front of them. Waiting for drawn out debates is not acceptable to them, and these actions have almost no downsides.

DHPersonal 2y ago
Picking the first offered action to a potential problem is a moral panic. Without intending it, one can potentially introduce different long-term negative effects. I am a parent of three and am fully aware of the anxieties of parenthood. I once held a similar position of anxiety about this issue until someone wrote a response to me that was very similar to my own in this thread. I’m trying to share something similar with others: to inform those concerned that banning is not necessarily the only or best option.