A Navy Seal's Semester at Yale, at Age 52 • Hacker News Board

Re: A Navy Seal's Semester at Yale, at Age 52

#121

Post by dang » Mon, Dec 23, 2019, 9:09 PM UTC

ganzuul wrote: post #114

dang wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN is certainly not a safe space. No large anonymous internet community can be.

It annoys me. Smart people should be able to deal with subjects outside their comfort zone but what I see here is the intellectual version of footguns employed more as a rule than an exception. - People downvote things they don't understand. - It's crazy. They can't even stand up for their opinions but do it anonymously, like cowards.

I think there's a confusion here:

Smart people should be able to deal with subjects outside their comfort zone

"Smart" is a cognitive trait; dealing with what is outside one's comfort zone is a different developmental axis altogether. Smart people are no better able to do this than anyone else, and may even have a harder time.

Re: A Navy Seal's Semester at Yale, at Age 52

#122

Post by abjKT26nO8 » Mon, Dec 23, 2019, 9:09 PM UTC

ganzuul wrote: post #116

abjKT26nO8 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By the definition of 'safe space' given by the article? I don't understand your reply. Perhaps you meant to reply to a different comment?

You said; > 'Disclaimer: I also don't like the idea of "safe spaces"...' The article defines a safe space as "...an environment where difficult subjects can be discussed openly, without the risk of disrespect or harsh judgement." I suppose I'm really asking you if you read TFA.

I read it. And I think that people shouldn't be shielded from harsh judgement or things that they may find offensive. Mutual respect is desired, but it isn't something that can be achieved by regulation --- unless you aim merely for a false sense of respect.

Re: A Navy Seal's Semester at Yale, at Age 52

#123

Post by manigandham » Mon, Dec 23, 2019, 9:10 PM UTC

hellomyguys wrote: post #107

manigandham wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is not at all the definition used in the article which is the point of the OP's comment. If the membership and topics are exclusive based on comfort then it is, by definition, not a safe space for any kind of difficult conversation. It's just a private club.

I think you're misunderstanding who these spaces are for and what purposes they serve. Are also you saying difficult conversations cannot be had by people sharing similar interests or beliefs? And since when are all private clubs bad?

We're talking about the literal definition used in the article, and that does not match up with what you're claiming. There is no limitation on membership to "vulnerable" people, whatever that means, nor is any voice "dominant" by default.

> "Are also you saying difficult conversations cannot be had by people sharing similar interests or beliefs?"

No, but freedom for difficult conversations are the qualifier for a "safe space", not the identity of the individuals and their comfort which would be antithetical to free discussion by all.

> "And since when are all private clubs bad?"

Nobody said that. The point is that a safe-space as defined in the article is not the same as a private club with limited identities and discussions.

Re: A Navy Seal's Semester at Yale, at Age 52

#124

Post by tptacek » Mon, Dec 23, 2019, 9:11 PM UTC

ItsMattyG wrote: post #99

tptacek wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason this isn't a devastating rhetorical blow is that everyone from scientists to basement-dwelling bigots believes they have "legitimate facts" on their side. People believe all sorts of random things, and some of those things are genuinely harmful. I'm not saying I know where the line needs to be drawn, but there clearly is a line somewhere; "drink bleach to cure diseases" seems like a solid (and real!) examp…

I mean, are you advocating for the policy that people shouldn't be allowed to say this? Would you have also advocated that people shouldn't say "mold cures disease"? How would we have then come to a consensus that in fact this mold does cure bacterial infections if we couldn't discuss it because it was considered "too dangerous to ever discuss"?

No. Rather, I'm saying two other things.

First, that it doesn't get us anywhere to declare some statements as "facts" or "objective truth", because whether or not something is or isn't a "fact" is in effect the entire debate; it begs the question.

Second, I'm pointing out that we already draw lines between colorable arguments and disqualified nonsense. For instance, if you attended Yale Medicine and started preaching that vaccines were poison and bleach was medicine, you would probably not last long there; Yale Medicine classes are (I presume) a "safe space" against "drink bleach" --- which, again, is an actual thing.

For the most part, you're allowed to tell people that bleach is medicine. You shouldn't, but you won't get arrested for it. Similarly: people who want other kinds of "safe spaces" aren't going to achieve a public policy outcome where transphobia and other forms of bigotry are outlawed; rather, they're aiming for something similar, in specific settings, to what top-tier medical schools do to disqualify laetrile advocacy. That doesn't sound crazy to me.

All this stuff is fraught, of course; I follow and endorse FIRE, who seem to have interesting things to say about this and come at it from a fairly hard-line 1A set of principles. Also, if you pay attention to FIRE, you'll see that this kind of campus free speech stuff comes from all sides of the political spectrum. Everyone overreaches; we're human.

Re: A Navy Seal's Semester at Yale, at Age 52

#125

Post by DuskStar » Mon, Dec 23, 2019, 9:13 PM UTC

manfredo wrote: post #113

tptacek wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All a puberty blocker does is delay the onset of puberty. They're part of the medical standard of care, and have no permanent effects that require reversal; their effects end as soon as they're taken. The whole point of them is to buy time for patients to more carefully consider their path going forward. They're practically the opposite of "unproven and ill-advised". I'm not seeing the "horrible" here. But more to th…

No permanent side effects? Risks of puberty blockers include compromise bone development, underdeveloped genitals, and infertility. I don't know where you're claiming that they're the "opposite of unproved and ill-advised". Using synthetic hormones to block puberty in adolescents and pre-teens is something that's only been done in the last decade or so. Most publications indicate that the safety is far from certain,…

Thank you for providing elaboration here!

Re: A Navy Seal's Semester at Yale, at Age 52

#126

Post by abjKT26nO8 » Mon, Dec 23, 2019, 9:13 PM UTC

ramblerman wrote: post #52

abjKT26nO8 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A common example is that people opposed to sex-reassignment surgery are not allowed into discussions about trangenderism [sic!] because their opinions are considered "disrespectful" or even "violent" to transgender people. What does "being opposed to sex-reassignment surgery" even mean? I see two options: 1. Being opposed to others having the possibility of undergoing such a surgery. 2. Being opposed to undergoing…

> In the first case, I do believe it's disrespectful of the freedom to do with one's body as one pleases You aren’t allowed to harm yourself. You could argue that you should but under current laws we protect people from that, mostly. Also doctors have to perform these surgeries in which case their oath would mandate we are certain this procedure isn’t causing harm. And finally and perhaps most importantly. These surg…

I think that I should be the judge of what is harmful to me. So you could say that I disagree with you, but FWIW I don't agree with the downvotes you received. Your points are valid, it seems that a lot of people use the downvote button as a sign of disagreement.

Re: A Navy Seal's Semester at Yale, at Age 52

#127

Post by coldtea » Mon, Dec 23, 2019, 9:14 PM UTC

asdfman123 wrote: post #35

didgeoridoo wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we’re talking past each other? I’m not making a value judgment per se. It is simply a fact that many in the toxic social justice group you reference do not believe that the work of dead white males is particularly interesting or important. Thus, they tend to self-select out of classes with an emphasis on the western canon. This isn’t an assumption — it’s an observation about many of my friends who took DS (I…

> toxic social justice group What group is that? Where can I find such a group that only has toxic members interested in social justice? > do not believe that the work of dead white males Does everyone in that group believe that specific thing as well? > self-select out of classes with an emphasis on the western canon What percentage of those people outright reject the Western cannon as not worth learning? Do some of…

>What group is that? Where can I find such a group that only has toxic members interested in social justice?

Well, there's this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8yvzBFESqZs

>It's like when people talk about "the south" as if it were one thing. I'm from the south, and if you get two random people who live in the southern US (or any part of the world) they will both be individuals with a complex system of beliefs

It's about aggregate behavior and prevalent norms, not about any two random people being the same as each other.

If those people's ideas where vectors, they'd be closer together and pointing towards a more similar direction, than from another group (say, Californians).

That doesn't mean you wont find vectors of millions of individual persons in the South pointing even the total opposite way for this or that matter typically associated with the South.

Re: A Navy Seal's Semester at Yale, at Age 52

#128

Post by m0zg » Mon, Dec 23, 2019, 9:16 PM UTC

Prediction: out within a year, after saying something not 150% politically correct to those "open minded" students in their "safe space". Nowadays you can get fired for insisting that biological differences exist between men and women or suggesting that, perhaps, uncontrolled, illegal immigration is an undesirable phenomenon. A 52 year old veteran is not going to survive walking over that minefield for very long.

Re: A Navy Seal's Semester at Yale, at Age 52

#129

Post by manigandham » Mon, Dec 23, 2019, 9:17 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #105

manigandham wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facts are objective truths. I don't see how discussing them could ever be a problem, regardless of how you consider the person quoting them. "Drink bleach to cure diseases" is not a fact. I'm not sure what that example is supposed to mean. Obviously people making stuff up is a problem but isn't that the complete opposite of facts?

How do you know what is an isn't an objective truth? People disagree about things. You've just shut down a real (and inexplicably popular) opposing view, that vaccines are poison and bleach is medicine. What gave you the right to do this?

The definition of objective means it's untainted by interpretation. These facts are scientific: studied, documented and verified with proofs and experiments to a complete consensus on their acceptance as truth.

Now people can still discuss and debate anything based on the facts as a narrative and reason for other topics and scenarios, but if you're debating the facts themselves then we're not going to get very far unless you bring evidence.

Re: A Navy Seal's Semester at Yale, at Age 52

#130

Post by dctoedt » Mon, Dec 23, 2019, 9:20 PM UTC

danharaj wrote: post #118

dctoedt wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It never ceases to astonish me how ready some people are to feel hurt and disrespected — and to brand anyone who disagrees with them as "shallow and pedantic." I have no desire to expend scarce brain cycles trying to keep up with who wants to be addressed in what manner.

> I have no desire to expend scarce brain cycles trying to keep up with who wants to be addressed in what manner. This is disrespectful. You might think that this disrespect is warranted- that's fine; one must make judgment calls about what to respect and what not to respect. It's still disrespect. Be yourself: own it :)

> This is disrespectful.

You've calibrated your disrespect alarm to an awfully low setpoint.