3 ms·

the right answer to ideological purity tests is not more ideological purity tests

by convolvatron 1y ago

quotemstr 1y ago
[flagged]
- patagurbon 1y ago
  An eye for an eye is not how scientific progress is made.
  - quotemstr 1y ago
    There's no conflict between 1) wishing nobody's eye be put out, and 2) thinking chronic and unrepentant eye-pokers have got it coming good and hard. The universities can stop the pain any time they want. All they have to do is recommit, seriously, to free speech and free pursuit of knowledge. What the universities are doing now is not conducive to scientific knowledge either. In fact, they produce a lot of anti-knowledge.
    - patagurbon 1y ago
      What are “they” doing now that is not conducive to scientific knowledge? > they produce a lot of anti-knowledge Regardless of the hilarity of that phrase being associated with universities over the attention driven news and internet that is both: 1. Meaninglessly broad and intentionally vague 2. Part of the process of science. For decades most of the genome was believed to be garbage. It was through academic research that this knowledge has been rebutted and replaced not by politics or regulation. This identical process occurs from philosophy to gender studies and physics to climate science.
    - ThrowMeAway1618 1y ago
      >What the universities are doing now is not conducive to scientific knowledge either. In fact, they produce a lot of anti-knowledge. Asimov was talking about you and those like you when he said[0]: There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." Your ignorance is not just as good as the knowledge of others, despite your protestations to the contrary. But at least you can be comforted that your ignorance is just more in a long tradition of ignorance, as ignominious as it might be. Booyah! USA! USA! USA! amirite? [0] https://www.azquotes.com/author/605-Isaac_Asimov https://www.azquotes.com/author/605-Isaac_Asimov
- whoisthemachine 1y ago
  Are these university administrations the government? Because any private entity is free to censor as much as they want (as we have seen with many entities after Charlie Kirk's murder). Saying "this private entity censored so now the government can" is not the argument you think it is.
  - Levitz 1y ago
    We are not talking about freedoms the entities have, we are talking about what is right. The government surely has the freedom to allocate their funds in whatever way they please.
    - whoisthemachine 1y ago
      Yes, in whatever way congress directs, and as long as it doesn't violate the constitution (if you want to change the constitution, you have to amend it). The executive branch is merely supposed to execute the law as congress writes it. I would be surprised it the law stated "if the entity does not follow the same ideology as the current occupant of the executive branch, then funds may be withheld", and such a law may be challenged on grounds of constitutionaliry...
  - wtcactus 1y ago
    This all measure is about making sure that private faculties can obey continue censoring whatever they want, as long as they don’t get public money. If they want to be free and private, they can do so with their own money.

the right answer to ideological purity tests is not more ideological purity tests

quotemstr 1y ago

[flagged]

patagurbon 1y ago
An eye for an eye is not how scientific progress is made.
- quotemstr 1y ago
  There's no conflict between 1) wishing nobody's eye be put out, and 2) thinking chronic and unrepentant eye-pokers have got it coming good and hard. The universities can stop the pain any time they want. All they have to do is recommit, seriously, to free speech and free pursuit of knowledge. What the universities are doing now is not conducive to scientific knowledge either. In fact, they produce a lot of anti-knowledge.
  - patagurbon 1y ago
    What are “they” doing now that is not conducive to scientific knowledge? > they produce a lot of anti-knowledge Regardless of the hilarity of that phrase being associated with universities over the attention driven news and internet that is both: 1. Meaninglessly broad and intentionally vague 2. Part of the process of science. For decades most of the genome was believed to be garbage. It was through academic research that this knowledge has been rebutted and replaced not by politics or regulation. This identical process occurs from philosophy to gender studies and physics to climate science.
  - ThrowMeAway1618 1y ago
    >What the universities are doing now is not conducive to scientific knowledge either. In fact, they produce a lot of anti-knowledge. Asimov was talking about you and those like you when he said[0]: There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge." Your ignorance is not just as good as the knowledge of others, despite your protestations to the contrary. But at least you can be comforted that your ignorance is just more in a long tradition of ignorance, as ignominious as it might be. Booyah! USA! USA! USA! amirite? [0] https://www.azquotes.com/author/605-Isaac_Asimov https://www.azquotes.com/author/605-Isaac_Asimov
whoisthemachine 1y ago
Are these university administrations the government? Because any private entity is free to censor as much as they want (as we have seen with many entities after Charlie Kirk's murder). Saying "this private entity censored so now the government can" is not the argument you think it is.
- Levitz 1y ago
  We are not talking about freedoms the entities have, we are talking about what is right. The government surely has the freedom to allocate their funds in whatever way they please.
  - whoisthemachine 1y ago
    Yes, in whatever way congress directs, and as long as it doesn't violate the constitution (if you want to change the constitution, you have to amend it). The executive branch is merely supposed to execute the law as congress writes it. I would be surprised it the law stated "if the entity does not follow the same ideology as the current occupant of the executive branch, then funds may be withheld", and such a law may be challenged on grounds of constitutionaliry...
- wtcactus 1y ago
  This all measure is about making sure that private faculties can obey continue censoring whatever they want, as long as they don’t get public money. If they want to be free and private, they can do so with their own money.