4 ms·
> Because no-one, including you, is an expert on everything. As I said, god forbid I forget my place and use my mind in the domain of my betters.
by abtinf 2y ago
> Because no-one, including you, is an expert on everything.
As I said, god forbid I forget my place and use my mind in the domain of my betters.
- threeseed 2y agoYou can continue to use your mind. Pretend that the Community Notes are a conspiracy to rob you of your free will and ignore them.
- brigandish 2y ago<country hick accent>Looks like we got ourselves a reader… Yep, reading, researching, considering what things matter given your own life experience and situation, these are all meaningless in the face of THE EXPERTS! /s When J.S. Mill wrote about infallibility[1], I can't remember if he wrote about outsourcing that infallibility belief to others, but if he did, he predicted the last 5 years of pro-censorship arguments perfectly. [1] https://www.bartleby.com/lit-hub/on-liberty/chapter-ii-of-the-liberty-of-thought-and-discussion https://www.bartleby.com/lit-hub/on-liberty/chapter-ii-of-th...
- rolandog 2y agoI'm no expert in this domain, but the larger issue at play here is that: 1. certain groups are arguing for assigning trust to a group to perform case-by-case censorship as a countermeasure to propaganda and disinformation, 2. other groups (sometimes purposefully) misinterpreting this as blanket censorship and conjure up several slippery-slope warnings. When talking about general things, it sounds very noble to talk about protecting every budding idea... therefore group #2 gets to trot around the higher moral ground when arguing in this way. When talking about the specific ideas being "censored" (e.g. "immigrants eating dogs"), group #1 gets to claim group #2 is some flavor of crazy. What both miss is that they have been pitted against each other by so many interest groups: nation-state and corporate. This is happening all around the globe.
- brigandish 2y agoStop the censorship then and the pitting you claim is happening disappears.