51–60 of 81 posts
Let's pre-empt the inevitable sub-thread: "This is a private educational establishment and they can do what they want. It is not censorship." and "If you have a problem with this, just start your own medical university".
The University of Virginia is a public institution so I’d imagine you would not see that argument.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> it's possible that ... he screamed abuse at the top of the lungs to university staff Oh boy, another thrilling game of disprove the negative.
Please don't quote less than half a sentence and then be surprised that it doesn't make sense. Also, that we can't now either way is exactly my point. We can't disprove either the student's nor the university's misconduct. Maybe ask yourself why you instantly see that when it comes to the student, but fail to see the exact same thing in regards to the defendants. Well, the good thing is that the court will actually d…
I’m afraid that when the pendulum of public perception inevitably swings away from this insanity, a lot of the social progress we’ve done on discourse and tolerance will be lost. If I’m reading this and saying “what these people are doing is evil, I’d like to affiliate with the opposite group of people”, I won’t have too many outlets that are not far right.
This has happened before. Read The History Man by Bradbury. And what will happen is that being "politically unreasonable" will be unfashionable and the society will swing to an equilibrium once again. The extremists will leave or retire and the people who kept their heads down will say "they were a silly bunch". In the UK they were labelled "The Loony Left" and subject to much comedy. To suggest that it's either one…
Also, part of the way this swinging back to equilibrium will work is by the left tearing each other apart with more and more demands to just accept the liberal orthodoxy handed down from on high. At each step along the way, more and more people will pop out and realize that the whole thing is flawed because it is based on the Appeal to Authority logical fallacy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Please don't quote less than half a sentence and then be surprised that it doesn't make sense. Also, that we can't now either way is exactly my point. We can't disprove either the student's nor the university's misconduct. Maybe ask yourself why you instantly see that when it comes to the student, but fail to see the exact same thing in regards to the defendants. Well, the good thing is that the court will actually d…
The audio is available, there's an injustice in my opinion. In either case it will be judged and tried. But the likely outcome is a victory on kieran side. You can't just kick a medical student over critical thinking
Wouldn't critical thinking also mean that you should keep in mind that an expelled student describing the situation in his legal complaint will be necessarily be biased? The complaint is literally written in the way that is best for his case.
Since apparently reason.com gets flagged — I submitted the original lawsuit text which cannot possibly be a biased source. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26737077
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Going to university in the USA these days sounds like an absolutely terrifying prospect, and doesn't sound very promising for the future of the country.
As long as you keep quiet about sensitive issues, you will be fine.
The only rules were to not take offense at a difference of opinions and not devolve into ad hominems and personal attacks.
I so often wonder with pieces like this: what am I missing? I mean, it’s hard to believe this was so one-sided and that he was a little angel through it all. It could be, I suppose. And I am outraged if it is. But the question that keeps nagging me... is it?
https://www.reddit.com/r/UVA/comments/ab1dy7/university_of_v...
My take is it that the plaintiff is a troll.
> On November 26, this suggestion became a mandate: The student was informed that he must be evaluated by psychological services before returning to classes. You know that something’s wrong when someone is forced to be psychologically evaluated for asking uncomfortable questions. This entire story looks like something straight out of a dystopia.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There shouldn’t be any “sensitive” issues in a university context. These “universities” look more like re-education centers than educational institutions. All those “sensitive” issues are plain ideological ideas and some people want those ideas to prevail by suppressing all conversation around them.
I think the discussion about this already over, i.e. it's now a part of the social contract that we don't question certain things, not because they're true or false but because of social cost of challenging them. For example, we know that the distribution of certain psychological traits in both genders is a bit different, but discussing it - either in the social context or the academia - is more or less a taboo in or…