Heresy • Hacker News Board

Re: Heresy

#331

Post by Beltalowda » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 4:02 PM UTC

morelisp wrote: post #228

Beltalowda wrote: post #155

I think this is an important part: "Fortunately in western countries the suppression of heresies is nothing like as bad as it used to be. Though the window of opinions you can express publicly has narrowed in the last decade, it's still much wider than it was a few hundred years ago. The problem is the derivative. Up till about 1985 the window had been growing ever wider. Anyone looking into the future in 1985 would…

Quoted post unavailable.

I don't see how someone's year of birth is related, or important?

If anything, I find it valuable to see perspectives that fall outside of my own experience. I was born in 1985. I don't remember what the world was like in 1985, or 1975, but I'm eager to learn about it to see what we've gained since then, or maybe lost, to better guide the path we should take in the future.

Re: Heresy

#332

Post by tptacek » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 4:03 PM UTC

I've deliberately avoided mentioning any specific heresies here

No, you didn't.

Re: Heresy

#333

Post by beaconstudios » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 4:03 PM UTC

3qz wrote: post #326

beaconstudios wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which groups are deserving of criticism that they're currently protected from?

For example, almost everything I’ve ever heard about white privilege is also true for Jewish people but it would be a career ending mistake to talk about the over representation of Jewish people in positions of power.

Jewish people are white though - and "white privilege" as a concept is primarily about how white people don't have to overcome racism or adapt their behaviour to the dominant culture to get ahead. It does connect with issues of diversity but it's not a direct explanation.

Re: Heresy

#334

Post by tshaddox » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 4:03 PM UTC

I wish he would just give examples or at least speak slightly more plainly about his complaint. I would understand his complaint more (and be able to decide whether I agree with him, although I’m fairly sure I don’t) if he would just say something very plainly like “I liked it better in 1985 when you could say X and have zero risk of losing your job.”

Re: Heresy

#335

Post by Koshkin » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 4:03 PM UTC

1970-01-01 wrote: post #243

Great essay as always, however the deliberate withholding of examples is irritating me. I'm not looking for witches to burn, but names or examples of "grumpy, censorious people in a group — the ones who are always first to complain when something violates the current rules of propriety." would be helpful to identify the described mentality.

Giving examples is left as an exercise for the reader.

Re: Heresy

#336

Post by skellington » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 4:03 PM UTC

Beltalowda wrote: post #240

Cpoll wrote: post #18

> I've deliberately avoided mentioning any specific heresies here. Which, looking at the replies, is a mistake, because everyone projects the least charitable interpretation and/or assumes the article is dog-whistling. The problem is that there are heresies and heresies, and conflating everything together isn't helpful. To give one extreme of a "heresy": It's reasonable to not want to associate with someone if they'r…

> Which, looking at the replies, is a mistake, because everyone projects the least charitable interpretation and/or assumes the article is dog-whistling. I think this is actually the big problem in the debate, not "cancel culture" or "heresies". A lot of people seem gleefully enthusiastic about seeing the worst in other people. This is not isolated to just one ideological side: people on the right engage in it just a…

This part of his essay addresses your thought:

...one of the universal tactics of heretic hunters, now as in the past, is to accuse those who disapprove of the way in which they suppress ideas of being heretics themselves.

Remember, these are religious fanatics not scientific objectivists.

Re: Heresy

#337

Post by tlogan » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 4:03 PM UTC

beaconstudios wrote: post #305

tlogan wrote: post #271

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.

Yeah I often see this kind of vague posting about cancel culture, but generally speaking people are being cancelled (which can either just mean being criticised, or the more legitimate problem of people contacting employers) for either directly saying things that are offensive (the aforementioned -isms) or are implications that directly lead to -ist conclusions. My understanding is that the underlying complaint is th…

Can you please be more specific? What is said which is considered ok but person got canceled? I’m definitely not left wing so I’m really confused with this GP post.

Is he defending racists? Is he defending sexists people? Nazis? I doubt so.

I understand that you cannot be Republican if you do not believe in gun rights. But these are political affiliations: nobody forced you to be Rebulican.

Re: Heresy

#338

Post by beaconstudios » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 4:04 PM UTC

emerged wrote: post #330

beaconstudios wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which groups are deserving of criticism that they're currently protected from?

Every single categorization of people other than white heterosexual men who are in the country legally?

What criticisms of these groups do you have in mind? That's like 80% of the world population.

Also think its a common misunderstanding to think of critical theory issues as relating directly to oneself. I'm a straight white guy and I understand concepts like privilege, and it's nothing to feel personal responsibility or guilt for.

Re: Heresy

#339

Post by phillipcarter » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 4:04 PM UTC

Biologist123 wrote: post #220

This essay was somewhat high on opinion, somewhat low on evidence. Paul Graham tweets a lot about this issue, and cancel culture is something he is apparently very sensitive too. It makes me wonder what happened - as given his lack of evidence - it appears to be an emotional reaction rather than a logical one. As an aside, most examples of people being fired for expressing opinions seem to come from academia. I’ve wo…

I have a far less positive view of education and many of the professors who have traditionally occupied it in the US. A whole lot of entrenched people with tenure who have formal authority over people (grad students) without even a hint of manager training and it really shows. Many of these people are downright childish, intentionally put blinders on the world immediately around them, and cause countless students unnecessary pain just so that their own eccentric personalities are accommodated.

Re: Heresy

#340

Post by kevingadd » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 4:04 PM UTC

seaourfreed wrote: post #246

dasil003 wrote: post #212

I think this is largely a social media phenomenon. Twitter flash mobs can destroy people’s lives in a vary offhanded, drive-by fashion simply because people with actual power are scared of them and capitulate to unreasonable demands. But if you talk with people in real life, you’ll find much more nuanced thinking and willingness to engage in open-minded debate. The problem is giving too much attention to extremist vi…

Paul posted this because this has escalated to getting people on the political right fired from their jobs (directly or indirectly). See his words: "Nowadays, in civilized countries, heretics only get fired in the metaphorical sense, by losing their jobs. But the structure of the situation is the same: the heresy outweighs everything else. You could have spent the last ten years saving children's lives, but if you ex…

Fired from their jobs for what, exactly? Being too fiscally conservative?

Most people in the US are under at-will employment, so they can be fired at any time for almost any reason. So if we're going to argue that they are being fired due to political persecution from the hard left, you have to make a thorough case there because you're saying their employer shouldn't be free to hire and fire whomever they like.