Heresy • Hacker News Board

Re: Heresy

#591

Post by ambrozk » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 6:25 PM UTC

NoraCodes wrote: post #521

twofornone wrote: post #481

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 a…

In general, there is nothing wrong with the government legislating what its employees may say when acting as agents of the government, just as there is nothing wrong with a corporation telling its employees what they may say when acting as agents of the corporation. Free speech does not mean, "Your employer cannot fire you for publicly contradicting company policy while on the clock." Note that there are limits to what the government can mandate with regard to its employees' communications, and the Florida bill may run up against them.

Re: Heresy

#592

Post by scarecrowbob » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 6:26 PM UTC

Feeling that there are more "heresies" now than, say, 25 years ago says a lot more about the orthodoxy of ones' opinion than it says about the state of the world.

Re: Heresy

#593

Post by nabla9 » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 6:26 PM UTC

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…

PG's essays have smug 'fleeting above it all' tone. He gives the impression that he is not talking about himself or his in-group. There is kind of unsaid hint.

More than 1,500 books have been banned in public schools, and a U.S. House panel asks why https://coloradonewsline.com/2022/04/09/more-than-1500-books...

Re: Heresy

#594

Post by plorkyeran » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 6:27 PM UTC

UncleMeat wrote: post #572

dnfa wrote: post #562

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I've deliberately avoided mentioning any specific heresies here Yeah this bothered me. His stance on this seems so defensive and personal and he gives very few examples of heretical ideas. It makes this essay more of a boomer diatribe than anything else imo.

It allows anybody who reads the piece to apply their own specifics to it. It means that if they hold any "heretical" beliefs, they can assume that PG supports them.

Or on the flip side, it means that the reader can assume that PG holds whatever unflattering "heretical" beliefs they are opposed to.

Re: Heresy

#595

Post by NoraCodes » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 6:27 PM UTC

version_five wrote: post #589

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…

> 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 politics of heresy emerging from the right I see the former (and maybe the latter, I honestly don't pay too much attention), but my interpretation is that a major culprit for any reversals in rights is the far left, who…

> the far left, who have upped demands from reasonable tolerance [...] to ridiculous [...] proportions that have caused the pushback.

This is the equivalent of the schoolyard bully saying "I wouldn't have hit him if he hadn't asked for his lunch money back."

Re: Heresy

#596

Post by ethbr0 » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 6:29 PM UTC

Beltalowda wrote: post #445

ScarletEmerald wrote: post #411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Another thing that muddies the discussion is the confusion between the legal protection of free speech and the ethical value of free speech. "Free speech" does not equal "freedom from being criticized" or "right to an audience". Me making fun of your argument or calling your argument stupid and x-ist is me exercising my free speech just as much as you are exercising yours in making you argument in the first place. Bu…

I think of the two sides as "pro-speech" and "anti-speech" dissent.

I can disagree and oppose your opinions by exercising my own right to free speech. I can afford you your own pulpit, air time, and freedom to make your point, and then I can take mine and make my point as loudly as I can. I can schedule a march or rally the same day, across the street.

This is what "pro-speech" dissent looks like.

I can also disagree and oppose your opinion by removing your right to free speech. I can contact people who might give you a platform, and convince them not to do so. I can attempt to impose consequences for you legally, socially, or physically that discourage you from speaking. I can shout over you from across the street, to ensure people can't hear your speech.

This is what "anti-speech" dissent looks like.

And, IMHO, "pro-speech" is more important than almost* any consequence of speech.

* The sole exceptions probably being speech that inspires imminent action to violate any person's individual rights (e.g. violence) or that has an imminent or fundamental threat to bring about a change in government to one which does not allow, support, and respect free speech.

Re: Heresy

#597

Post by NoraCodes » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 6:29 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #590

NoraCodes wrote: post #548

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> how would anyone look at a Republican administration whose first Supreme Court appointee penned a seminal decision on LGBT employment protections More recently, the court seems to be looking to overturn Obergefell. [1] > the current flash point on “women's rights” (Roe) I was referring to the proposed reinstatement of child marriage in TN. [2] 1: https://www.educationviews.org/clarence-thomas-signals-willi... 2: ht…

> More recently, the court seems to be looking to overturn Obergefell. [1] This is a complete misreading of that opinion. Note that both Thomas and Alito concurred in the denial of cert. They said nothing of overturning Obergefell , but criticized the process by which it was done—by judicial fiat rather than legislation. Specifically, this meant that the legislature had no ability to consider and address religious ob…

> Meanwhile Colorado just legalized killing babies right up until birth.

Woah, really? Let's see... https://www.cnn.com/2022/04/04/politics/colorado-abortion-ri...

> The governor emphasized that the new law "does not make any changes to the current legal framework," saying: "This bill simply maintains this status quo regardless of what happens at the federal level and preserves all existing constitutional rights and obligations."

Re: Heresy

#598

Post by shadowgovt » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 6:29 PM UTC

nitrogen wrote: post #472

shadowgovt wrote: post #9

Graham has forgotten his own essays if he thinks that this is a rebirth. "What you can't say" [ http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html ] is one of the first of his essays I ever read. It eventually directed me to this site. At the time, I thought it was brilliant. 18 years on, I think it's a good piece of writing but he's only got half the story. Sadly, today's essay suggest to me he hasn't found the other half in the in…

smartest person in the room ... falling right into the consequence that taboo was intended to protect against. I think you've made an interesting argument, but isn't this evidence that the taboo mechanism is failing at its job and needs to be replaced with something better?

Every system has weaknesses.

The advantage to the taboo system is that if it's the smart folk who are getting themselves into sticky situations jumping fences, at least they're smart enough to have a fair shot at getting out.

Anything we replace it with needs to maintain the feature of protecting the most vulnerable... Taboos have the advantage of being simple, so you don't have to be smart to adhere to them.

Re: Heresy

#599

Post by ambrozk » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 6:30 PM UTC

kbenson wrote: post #485

nonrandomstring wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The speed with which society is moving is also a factor. Tacitus or Voltaire are variously credited with the notion that in any epoch, to know who is in power, ask who you may not criticise. I think Graham is slightly missing the point about our period. It's not that heresy is on the up, so much as it's on the move. Outrage is a homeless beast. We're in an Orwellian age where it changes with the seasons, so what is h…

> Also it is no longer power that metes out punishment There are different types of power, and what I think we're seeing is that whip traditionally those different types of power have rested in the same individuals, that's not so true anymore. Financial and political power is still mostly where it's always been. Social power has been democratized far more and far more quickly in recent years, to the point that those…

I agree with most of what you've written but I don't think it's correct to think of social power having been "democratized." It seems more accurate to view the transformation we've seen as existing mostly at the top of society. Highly networked, social-media savvy college-educated elites have figured out how exert power on structures which were previously by other highly networked, college-educated elites.

Re: Heresy

#600

Post by hintymad » Sun, Apr 10, 2022, 6:30 PM UTC

> 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.

This is such a great summary on the hypocrisy that went rampant in the past few years in the US media and US politics.