Can somebody list “heresies” which we are not allowed to say but they are ok? I cannot find a single one. But maybe I’m missing something.
Heresy
271–280 of 1001 posts
Re: Heresy
#272Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is the reason it's sexist because it can be interpreted as "women are less capable than men"? You would say this other statement is false and sexist, correct?
"Women are less capable than men" is sexist; "The majority of women are physically and mentally incapable of running a Fortune 500 company" is a neutral hypothesis that can be asserted with anecdotal evidence, sociological studies, and if modern corporate leadership wasn't silent on the issue, there would also likely be firsthand testimony. For the record, the commenter above who casually states that "most women can'…
You're giving too little attention to social context. The latter statement will rarely be interpreted neutrally when uttered in societies where statements denigrating females' capabilities has been (or continues to be) a cultural norm.
Re: Heresy
#273Earlier quoted context omitted.
Just read the comments in here. This is a whole lot of words to say: "I wish I could say things without facing consequences." As somebody else said in this thread, it's really rich to see Paul write about "implicitly ending the discussion" when he instablocks anybody on Twitter so easily.
> it's really rich to see Paul write about "implicitly ending the discussion" Misquote. He said "implicitly ending the discussion by calling someone a x-ist", which is not the same at blocking someone who is annoying - blocking someone is just shutting your door, not making them lose their livelihood by defaming them.
Simply calling someone x-ist does not cause them to lose their livelihood by defaming them.
If you know of any instance where someone has lost their livelihood due _only_ to being called an x-ist, please share.
Re: Heresy
#274The comment you want to read: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30977924
Re: Heresy
#275G.K. Chesterton boiled this down pretty well: “The Special mark of the modern world is not that it is skeptical, but that it is dogmatic without knowing it. It says, in mockery of old devotees, that they believed without knowing why they believed. But the moderns believe without knowing what they believe - and without even knowing that they do believe it. Their freedom consists in first freely assuming a creed, and t…
Too complicated. The culture war was explicitly born of a left-wing power grab through cultural means, and it was foisted on college students starting in like 2014, and has had remarkable success (for its proponents). College kids believe a lot of stuff without knowing what, or why, and cancel culture rules are no different.
Re: Heresy
#276Re: Heresy
#277Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm really wondering why this is a problem. Sure, that might insulate him and put him in an echo chamber, but blocking is entirely his right, and he's the one who'll get the consequences from that. I also tend to do a similar thing in spaces I curate, and it's honestly better for mental health. Someone comes out from nowhere with something completely 180 degrees from what I say? That's not reality TV, that's my priva…
> I'm really wondering why this is a problem. To take an example from my own experience, if I automatically tuned out anyone who said something bad about the requirement to make things accessible for blind people, I would deny myself the opportunity to learn how they think and become more effective in my advocacy or, possibly, revise my position.
Yes, I mention that in the second paragraph. That's his to decide.
If you're interested in hearing the other side in all cases, then of course blocking is counter-intuitive. Wether he wants or not, it's his choice.
However, even if you were to block everyone, you could still curate the experience of hearing from the other side in other situations: by consuming articles, by asking someone privately, by not blocking some of the replies.
I also would disagree 100% that social networks are a proper venue for this kind of exchange.
He still has 100% the right to block and saying this is akin to cancellation is bullshit.
Re: Heresy
#278We should all strive to keep an open mind, especially to ideas contrary to our own. But it’s not easy, because every group, in every society, organically develops its own heresies – things you cannot say without consequences. For example, here are some heresies common in the Silicon Valley startup community: * Heresy: “Government regulations are, on the whole, a net force for the good of humanity.” * Heresy: “All ent…
* Meritocracy isn't, because merit cannot be easily measured and it is trivial for successful bad actors to build moats that prevent anyone else getting as valued as them.
* Higher economic growth can be achieved by investing in education, but nobody would do that, because it's (rightfully) illegal to sell yourself into slavery in exchange for education.
* Regulatory capture sucks and is super hard to work around. It should be combated instead of being relied on as a future moat against competitors.
Re: Heresy
#279Woo boy. Generally liked the concept for the essay, but this piece jumps out as problematic (or just poorly written): > The clearest evidence of this is that whether a statement is considered x-ist often depends on who said it. Truth doesn't work that way. The same statement can't be true when one person says it, but x-ist, and therefore false, when another person does. Really? He can’t think of a statement that is r…
I read that as "Truths can be stated by anyone, and are still true". If you are saying some truths can only be said or are only true for some groups... We'll have to agree to disagree.
I take issue with the speaker not influencing whether a statement is or is not “x-ist”
There are truths that are empirical (math, physics, etc), but most controversy that includes “x-ism” is about things that are subjective and don’t bucket neatly into a true/false dichotomy.
Re: Heresy
#280What is the name for people who call you a heretic? This forum is full of them.