Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The latest campus cancellation is different

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 520 posts

Re: The latest campus cancellation is different

#281

Post by ta988 »

farmerstan wrote: post #171
umvi wrote: post #3

How do we neuter the power of Twitter mobs? Seems like they can bully and intimidate any organization from universities to corporations to GitHub projects to kowtow to their demands. Their demands are usually to fire, boycott, or boot people with opinions that run afoul of the mob. Not a healthy precedent to set. We will regret this later if we continue down this path.

I think Dave Chappelle and Joe Rogan are setting the standard for ignoring cancel culture, and are being rewarded for it. I think most moderate people are sick of cancel culture and will support those that won’t buckle to it.

I only hope these will not be the voices of the opposition of cancel culture. As much as I don't want to see cancellations like that, I found that these two are not elevating the debate either.

Re: The latest campus cancellation is different

#282

Post by cratermoon »

lolinder wrote: post #188
dfdz wrote: post #144

> John Carlson Lecture As a disclaimer I am against any censorship of academia and think that even Charles Murray should be allowed to speak at a university (assuming he is invited by an academic department or student group) and that the university should never have veto power. However, I think the example in the Atlantic is actually more mild than past cases: the John Carlson Lecture is a general audience talk that…

The article argues, and I agree, that a university is free to not invite someone if they view them as controversial. Where the problem really is is that they invited him and then retracted the invitation in response to a mob. The retraction is what makes this problematic. EDIT: the other point that the article makes is that this professor's "controversial" views are held by upwards of 70% of the American public. The…

> this professor's "controversial" views are held by upwards of 70% of the American public.

First of all, who says? Second of all, just because a majority believes something doesn't make it right. There was a time when the majority of Americans believed slavery was OK. Times change.

Re: The latest campus cancellation is different

#283

Post by coldtea »

umvi wrote: post #3

How do we neuter the power of Twitter mobs? Seems like they can bully and intimidate any organization from universities to corporations to GitHub projects to kowtow to their demands. Their demands are usually to fire, boycott, or boot people with opinions that run afoul of the mob. Not a healthy precedent to set. We will regret this later if we continue down this path.

>How do we neuter the power of Twitter mobs?

Ignore their demands (as an enterprise, business, institution, government, etc.), mock and derise their members (as a society), and stop publicizing them (as media).

Re: The latest campus cancellation is different

#284

Post by bananasbandanas »

SiempreViernes wrote: post #82
commandlinefan wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the majority of people also hold this view His argument is strengthened by, but doesn’t rely on, that fact.

Popularity absolutely does not impact the logical correctness of an argument: an argument is true by virtue of its own structure, if you say popularity somehow affects its correctness you've basically jettisoned logic in favour of subjective opinion. At best popularity serves as a useful heuristic for when you don't have the means to carefully confirm the correctness yourself. (There is a fairly uninteresting special…

I think you are conflating popularity of an argument with popularity as part of an argument. For the former, it's easy to agree that it does not affect the correctness of the argument. But in the articles case, popularity is part of the argument: That it is especially worrying the speaker is uninvited for an opinion which is held by a majority of people, i.e is popular.

Another example of this would be if we were having an argument about what music to play at some event we are hosting. I might well use the popularity of some songs as an argument.

Re: The latest campus cancellation is different

#286

Post by ta988 »

papandada wrote: post #88
lugged wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You know Twitter is not a real place right?

I do hope Dave Chappelle might start a trend of "ignore Twitter and suffer no consequences"

I do hope we would all move on to better things than those massive social networks. They have impacted really negatively the lives of many around me, and continue to do so.

Re: The latest campus cancellation is different

#287

Post by tptacek »

civilized wrote: post #191
metagame wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here, I'll give a rebuttal, even though I don't think every internet comment deserves a reply, your comment included. It is an outreach event. The majority of people in developed nations live in progressive cities, and hold center-liberal to outright progressive views. Now, if you're trying to spread propaganda, good or bad, you want to do it in the most efficient way possible. Just as you wouldn't put a radical Sata…

The activists who demanded this aren't the ones who need to be persuaded on climate change. MIT just handed the center and right-of-center, full of actual climate skeptics who need to be persuaded, another cancel culture event. Your whole post hinges on the assumption that the prospects of fighting climate change hinge on the approval of college town progressives. In reality, their approval is the least important thi…

This "sea of words" stuff is uncivil and doesn't make your comment any more persuasive.

Re: The latest campus cancellation is different

#288

Post by angelzen »

inglor_cz wrote: post #43
umvi wrote: post #3

How do we neuter the power of Twitter mobs? Seems like they can bully and intimidate any organization from universities to corporations to GitHub projects to kowtow to their demands. Their demands are usually to fire, boycott, or boot people with opinions that run afoul of the mob. Not a healthy precedent to set. We will regret this later if we continue down this path.

Vote in or appoint new leaders who do not give a damn about them. May backfire if too callous people are the winners. Another method, create a formal method for processing complaints from Twitter that diverts the hateful energy from individuals towards a larger decision-making body. Let us say that a random 24 people jury of MIT peers had to decide by secret ballot whether the researcher in question gets approved or…

This may be part of the solution, though, as other mentioned, juries can also be pressured on Twitter.

Part of the problem is that people with visible status engage in public harassment of their colleagues on Twitter with no consequences. Unless there is a cost for appalling behavior, the problem will continue to degenerate.

Re: The latest campus cancellation is different

#289

Post by civilized »

throwaway984393 wrote: post #270

Actually it's not different. University lecturers have been protested or cancelled for decades for reasons unrelated to their topic, usually due to political beliefs or corporate interests that clashed with students' ideals. "Cancel culture" is specifically about "personal" societal reforms, which is what makes it different than the older complaints about general politics. Back in the day it was "edgy" to protest or…

I get the historical analogy with anti-Vietnam War protesters. I just don't agree that they are actually the moral equivalent of anti-anti-racial-preference protesters. And I definitely don't believe that the majority will see it that way in a few decades.

The moral foundations for Vietnam War opposition are much intellectually deeper and ideologically broader than those supporting racial preferences. A medieval Catholic could have opposed the Vietnam War on grounds of just war theory.

Re: The latest campus cancellation is different

#290

Post by k__ »

q1w2 wrote: post #218
k__ wrote: post #157

He wants a system based on merit? Where should this merit come from for underrepresented groups if not from affirmative action?

Affirmative action is explicitly NOT admitting people due to merit.

I know.

My reasoning is:

If your member of an underrepresented group, chances are you didn't grow up to develop merit. Affirmative action allows you to access institutions that help you to develop merit.

Post reply on HN