Resignation Letter • Hacker News Board

Re: Resignation Letter

#321

Post by koheripbal » Tue, Jul 14, 2020, 5:35 PM UTC

fullshark wrote: post #156

mikece wrote: post #39

"And so self-censorship has become the norm." This might be the most ironic and most dangerous effect of this "right think" regime: that the free expression and exchange of ideas is thwarted in advance because one doesn't want to deal with drama, fight, or insults that come with saying something not in lock-step with the prevailing group-think. This blunts the curiosity of the intellect and silences all true disciple…

> This might be the most ironic and most dangerous effect of this "right think" regime: How it is ironic? It's the explicit intention.

Bingo. Twitter is a platform for intimidation.

Re: Resignation Letter

#322

Post by mtgp1000 » Tue, Jul 14, 2020, 5:35 PM UTC

It appears that there is a higher than usual proportion of negatively scored comments ITT. I think that might say something about the so called silent majority - the very people who are [rightly] unwilling to comment publicly because of the cancel culture highlighted in the article.

Those people are here, anonymous votes give them a voice that they are socially being denied.

Re: Resignation Letter

#323

Post by joshuamorton » Tue, Jul 14, 2020, 5:35 PM UTC

mpweiher wrote: post #300

joshuamorton wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you elaborate on what makes critical theoy less of an underlying philosophical idea of western Civilization than whatever else it is you're referring to? Philosophical debate didn't end in the mid 18th century. It's just that post enlightenment philosophy hasn't been taught in the west since the mid 1900s.

Not "critical theory", Critical Theory . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_theory In the current context: https://newdiscourses.com/tftw-critical-theory/

I'm familiar with critical theory. My question was not "what is critical theory" but why are the underlying philosophical ideas of western civilization? (I will say I was pleasantly surprised with the evenhandedness of that source, disregarding the last two paragraphs)

Like, Christianity is one of the underlying philosophical ideas of western civilization, and enlightenment era philosophers were quite mixed on it, so I'm unclear what the underlying concerns are here.

Re: Resignation Letter

#324

Post by koheripbal » Tue, Jul 14, 2020, 5:37 PM UTC

chasing wrote: post #130

mikece wrote: post #39

"And so self-censorship has become the norm." This might be the most ironic and most dangerous effect of this "right think" regime: that the free expression and exchange of ideas is thwarted in advance because one doesn't want to deal with drama, fight, or insults that come with saying something not in lock-step with the prevailing group-think. This blunts the curiosity of the intellect and silences all true disciple…

Oh, please. If you say dumb or offensive stuff, people are going to react. It's not the "right think regime" — it's people disagreeing, often with some extra acid if you're a high profile New York Times opinion columnist and readers don't feel you deserve that kind of an international platform for your words.

Let's be honest. You don't care about bullying because you agree ideologically with the bullies, and want to silence the bullied, because you don't agree with them.

Whether it's intimidation, firing, deplatforming, banning, whatever - you are ok with all of this because for you, it's all just the means to an end that you agree with.

Re: Resignation Letter

#325

Post by AzzieElbab » Tue, Jul 14, 2020, 5:38 PM UTC

joshuamorton wrote: post #203

seneca wrote: post #117

> Instead, a new consensus has emerged in the press, but perhaps especially at this paper: that truth isn’t a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few whose job is to inform everyone else. People need to understand that this is on purpose. What we are witnessing is an all out attack on Liberal values by the followers of Critical Theory. > It follows from Horkheimer's defin…

Can you elaborate on what makes critical theoy less of an underlying philosophical idea of western Civilization than whatever else it is you're referring to? Philosophical debate didn't end in the mid 18th century. It's just that post enlightenment philosophy hasn't been taught in the west since the mid 1900s.

Never thought a lazy appropriation of my Soviet high school history textbook can be labeled a "philosophical idea".

Re: Resignation Letter

#326

Post by seibelj » Tue, Jul 14, 2020, 5:39 PM UTC

jakelazaroff wrote: post #254

seibelj wrote: post #229

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What do you disagree with in the Harper's letter itself (the content, not the publication or the signatories), and why? I assume you also support the letter, if it had appeared in a publication you approved of?

Again: > Initially, I was criticizing the content, which is on its face false: we are discussing multiple widely–read pieces from prominent people who claim they are being "canceled" for their views. If Alice makes a claim about herself, it is not "attacking the source" to say the claim is false. That also doesn't mean that the same claim would be false if Bob made it about himself. So, yes: if smaller writers who ha…

It sounds like you are immediately suspect of anyone who has had success and thus become "powerful" (successful). The signatories of the Harper's letter, such as Noam Chomsky, Thomas Chatterton Williams, and Salman Rushdie, are successful because they have had long careers and widespread general praise for their work. Smaller, newer writers aren't "marginalized", they are early in their careers and need to work for a long time to break out in a cutthroat industry.

The signatories of the letter make the person who disagrees with the current orthodoxy, and still supports free speech, feel safer and in good company for doing so. Signing a letter is quick and doesn't stop them from also helping solve all the other issues they believe in - people can do two (or more!) things at once.

I am a lot less interested in political statements from people - you, me, the guy down the street - who are not luminaries in their respected fields. I am much more interested when such a diverse and respected group of people have those views.

As a footnote, you say "might have supported it". Imagine hypothetically that it was published in some underground zine signed by unknown writers. What in the letter did you disagree with? It's a brief letter, there should be something in there that is clearly risque if you "might" support it?

Re: Resignation Letter

#327

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Jul 14, 2020, 5:39 PM UTC

enraged_camel wrote: post #248

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #27

> Twitter is not on the masthead of The New York Times. But Twitter has become its ultimate editor. As the ethics and mores of that platform have become those of the paper, the paper itself has increasingly become a kind of performance space. Stories are chosen and told in a way to satisfy the narrowest of audiences, rather than to allow a curious public to read about the world and then draw their own conclusions. I…

>> Can't anyone there see past the current insanity and think? "To be inclusive, we have to get rid of her"? Don't they even hear the words coming out of their own mouths? This confuses a lot of people, but the explanation is simple: it is the Paradox of Tolerance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance Namely, not tolerating someone, who themselves espouse intolerant views and give voice to intolerant ex…

[deleted]

Re: Resignation Letter

#328

Post by BTCOG » Tue, Jul 14, 2020, 5:40 PM UTC

shuntress wrote: post #280

uncoder0 wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Whats worse is this phenomenon isn't contained to the NYT all media it appears is infected.

It is somewhat alarming to see this hostile and dehumanizing language (referring to "all media" as "infected") and makes me automatically skeptical of your point-of-view.

[flagged]

Re: Resignation Letter

#329

Post by leephillips » Tue, Jul 14, 2020, 5:41 PM UTC

mrandolph wrote: post #294

leephillips wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give me an exmaple of an intelligent discussion there? I’m genuinely curious. I’ve watched parts of a few of his chats with interesting people, such as Sam Harris, but I didn’t last long, as they veered immediately into vapidity and stayed there. (I agree he’s civil, though.)

I find that the more specialist the guest, the more interesting the conversation, especially when Rogan just shuts his mouth and listens to someone passionate about their field. Lex Fridman, Brian Cox, and Sean Carroll had--in my opinion--super interesting and engaging episodes. That being said, there are currently over 1500 episodes, so there are definitely a good number of fluff episodes in the mix as well. Edit: J…

Thanks a lot! I’ll check these out some day.

Re: Resignation Letter

#330

Post by cygx » Tue, Jul 14, 2020, 5:41 PM UTC

mikece wrote: post #320

cygx wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I might be misremembering but I thought her appearance on the Joe Rogan podcast was cited by some as her making a fool of herself while trying to answer an honestly curious question by Joe She called Tulsi Gabbard an 'Assad toady' with monstrous ideas. The funny part was them looking up the definition of toady (Joe wasn't aware of the meaning of the word), but the more damning part was Bari's defense of that characte…

The episode -- linked below -- with Tim Poole, Jack Dorsey, and Vijaya Gadde (who manages Twitter policy) was mostly just Rogan sitting back and watching Poole go back and forth with Dorsey and Gadde, mainly only stepping in to deescalate when things started getting heated or to ask a question about which he was curious. I don't recall if it was in that episode (or a previous interview just with Tim Poole) that they…

I thought that was a pretty intense debate and one that has significant importance give it's election year.

Sure, there are such episodes; I can think of another one off-hand, and if I took time, probably a couple more. But remember, the JRE podcast is currently at episode 1506, and most of them aren't like that.