Heresy • Hacker News Board

Re: Heresy

#521

Post by NoraCodes » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 5:34 PM UTC

twofornone wrote: post #481

UnpossibleJim wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the problem with this argument is the free speech "is at an all time high if you zoom out a bit". This is much like the argument, "gun violence is at an all time low if you zoom out a bit" argument. Both of these statements are true in the macro, but if you look at the trends, they point to a very disturbing line. The call for the restriction of free speech on the right(1) and the left (2) have increased in v…

These claims that the "don't say gay" legislation stifles free speech are dishonest. These are teachers, agents of the state, in a professional setting, not private citizens expressing opinions off the clock. If I'm paying taxes for public education then I should have a say in what gets taught, and that includes culture.

Now, wait a second - either it's bad that people get fired for expressing opinions, as Graham states in the essay, or it's not and people _should_ get fired for expressing opinions that you don't like. I don't think you can have it both ways. It's not even as if there's a conflict of interest here, as in the case of public officials being banned from certain kinds of political speech; these teachers are not hurting anyone or disrupting any civil processes, so under what principle is it acceptable to deny them the same freedoms Graham argues for in the case of corporate employees?

Re: Heresy

#522

Post by chasing » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 5:35 PM UTC

I’ll point out that saying true statements but framing them in a racist or sexist way is an extremely common tactic. In fact, it’s the preferred tactic of many bad actors because it’s very easy to hide behind the “but it’s true!” defence.

Something can be true and also presented with racist or sexist intent.

Re: Heresy

#523

Post by jameshart » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 5:36 PM UTC

javajosh wrote: post #91

vinceguidry wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should probably go look at the current state of diagnosis and treatment of gender dysphoria before giving your hot take. If caught and treated early, gender reassignment surgery can work miracles on a child's quality of life. It really shouldn't be seen any differently than other treatable birth defects.

What is the liklihood of the child being confused, mistaken, or later changing their mind? TBH my concern is that liberal parents, excited at the prospect that their little white boy will avoid a lifetime of abuse by transitioning to being a little white girl, will not even preach caution, but will hasten the transition to a better, more protected, identity.

"a better, more protected, identity"

If you don't recognize that playing life as a middle class white, cis, male is still 'easy mode' compared to literally any other option... I don't know what to tell you.

Re: Heresy

#524

Post by rayiner » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 5:36 PM UTC

jacobolus wrote: post #513

NoraCodes wrote: post #498

> The reason the current wave of intolerance comes from the left is simply because the new unifying ideology happened to come from the left. The next one might come from the right. Imagine what that would be like. I'm curious how Mr. Graham can look at a country that is in the process of reversing much of the last half-century's progress on women's rights, LGBTQ+ rights, and disability rights, and _not_ see a politic…

Paul Graham grew up in a time when rich middle-aged white men with no relevant experience or credential could spout off about whatever topic they wanted, including pseudo-intellectual racism/misogyny, and everyone would be forced to listen to their nonsense unable to respond with more than an eye-roll for fear of reprisals. (For that matter, when Graham grew up those powerful white dudes could beat people up, sexuall…

No post body was provided.

Re: Heresy

#525

Post by tlogan » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 5:36 PM UTC

tshaddox wrote: post #334

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.”

I think by not mentioning examples he clearly communicate them to the people who are “x-ist”.

Re: Heresy

#526

Post by native_samples » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 5:37 PM UTC

One of the interesting things about this essay is the way it criticizes orthodoxy and heresies, then casually throws in people who refuse vaccines as "extremists" equivalent to people who enforce the concept of heresy.

But that doesn't really make sense because "thou shalt never question the divinity of vaccines" is a modern day orthodoxy, and those who do in fact question them are the modern day heretics, with scientific institutions being the modern Church. Heretics aren't actually set on fire these days but they are e.g. currently banned from entering the United States and many other countries, and just a few months ago they were banned from all public places etc.

A man truly dedicated to the abolition of heresy would recognize that by calling people as "extremists" is in fact (perhaps unrealising) the exact same behavior he is criticizing. After all, has he talked to these people to understand their heresy? My guess is no. Rather, he just feels in his bones that by Following The Science™ he is a morally and intellectually superior creature.

When an essay that thinks it's arguing for the ending of heresy cannot even avoid damning some heretics, I see no particular reason for optimism, as Graham does. Rather this problem will get worse before it gets better, if it ever does.

Re: Heresy

#527

Post by Apocryphon » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 5:37 PM UTC

xboxnolifes wrote: post #488

Beltalowda wrote: post #331

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> I don't see how someone's year of birth is related, or important? It's related because people are incredibly biased toward liking things "as they were" when growing up. I'd be more impressed by accounts of people growing up in a time before the one they are praising.

Personally, as someone who came of age during the Bush administration and the War on Terror, all of these cancel culture wars bore me because it’s all I’ve ever known. Since 2003 or so, I’ve never not seen American politics and civil society as a hyper-partisan wonderland of information bubbles and people shouting heresy.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30210730

Re: Heresy

#528

Post by cpr » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 5:37 PM UTC

gumby wrote: post #448

The quotation about Isaac Newton was a poor choice for this essay as it was clearly allegorical about Newton himself . Even if you don’t know anything about the man, it should be clear from the claim that marriage might be a sin. In reality, the comment reflects four important things about Newton: 1 - marriage: he never married and once complained about someone trying to set him up with a woman; 2 - heresy: he was a…

I think it was just a somewhat tongue-in-cheek reference to the fact that he was a don, who don't marry.

Re: Heresy

#529

Post by erikpukinskis » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 5:37 PM UTC

zozbot234 wrote: post #476

Osmose wrote: post #258

The behavior he's calling "heresy" here cannot be evaluated in a vacuum; these kinds of statements are all contextual, ESPECIALLY hinging on who is saying them. And the reason that is the case is because the consequences of saying something are different depending on who says them. Paul Graham is wealthy and influential, and actively tries to influence folks with essays like this. So when he says something, it is jud…

James Damore was a lowly software engineer and that did not save him from being canceled by the mob and losing his job. All the more outrageous because his working paper was an honest and forthright - and broadly accurate - response to an express request for feedback about how to improve working conditions. Shades of "let a thousand flowers bloom".

Is "honest and forthright" really the only qualification for working at Google?

What about being professional? Meaning... getting your work done in a way that you're not making other people hate you?

I can totally imagine a workplace where "It's not your problem if other people hate you" is the norm. And I'm happy for people who find an employer like that and enjoy that. But does every workplace need to be like that?

What's wrong with a workplace saying "you need to be clued in to how your colleagues are affected by you"?

For me, that's table stakes in being a profesional.

Re: Heresy

#530

Post by blindmute » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 5:37 PM UTC

Ancapistani wrote: post #421

mjburgess wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a "truth vs. order" debate. PG is in highly stable environments where order isnt an issue, so he is more concerned about truth. Generally, when "x-isms" are accused, the issue is the break down of social order in the environment in which the accusations are made. It really doesnt matter if your x-ist point is true, if saying it, is an action which destabilizes (eg.,) the workplace. Most spaces aren't for discuss…

> It's a "truth vs. order" debate. > It really doesnt matter if your x-ist point is true, if saying it, is an action which destabilizes (eg.,) the workplace. I think this is pretty insightful. There are two things at play here that I think are being conflated - one is challenging certain concepts, and the other is challenge the social order that is predicated upon them. Let’s take racism as an example. Arguing that r…

As an aside, I was in your precise situation, but I ended up telling my SF company the truth. I'm sure they do view me differently now, but it's worth the feeling of value congruence to tell the truth and normalize such things.