5 ms·

If you find a rational person willing to defend any of the points you made, then yes, it is wrong to be against that discussion.

nl 9y ago
Well.. Your comment was marked as "dead" and I just vouched for it, so does that count as not trying to censor every idea that disagrees with me? ;) But I'm not convinced. There have been plenty of racists with arguments they consider rational. I think they are factually wrong, but surely the real point is "what you are saying is offensive and immoral" rather than try to argue that (eg) the costs associated with keeping black slaves is too much for the income the bring.
- Chris2048 9y ago
  If a viewpoint is censored (or controversial), it is human nature to seek it out, end even compensate it with more "weight" than it might otherwise be given. This is why the latest in rhetoric is not to censor something, but to explicitly acknowledge it and damn it with faint praise (or claim it is mediocre, boring, denounced etc). Furthermore, another way to damn a viewpoint is to associate it with poor arguments; or to strengthen a claim surround it with strong (or at least battle-tested/accepted/familiar) arguments. You should be happy that a true claim is discussed, creating stronger arguments, and making those better known; and that false claims are also discussed, explicitly demonstrating the poor arguments used to defend them. Now, whether a poor/strong argument is recognised as such, that is another issue, and goes to the "rational literacy" of the general public, which certainly is an issue (on both sides).
jamesrcole 9y ago
A rational discussion of it does not mean defending it! As Aristotle apparently said "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." If we can't even discuss certain topics, if we can't even think things through, then we've entered the realm of thought police.
- nl 9y ago
  But if discussion of abhorrent ideas is enough to spread them, is the benefit of that discussion worthwhile? I ask this in a bit more depth here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14967029 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14967029
  - jamesrcole 9y ago
    It's obviously difficult to prove any position on this matter, but I definitely think it's worthwhile. I think the idea that we should suppress mere discussion of certain topics is very dangerous, and could lead society down a very dark path. Let's not forget that things like interracial marriage, gay marriage and equality for women were once widely considered "abhorrent ideas".
Chris2048 9y ago
But there are no points, just topics.

nl 9y ago

Well.. Your comment was marked as "dead" and I just vouched for it, so does that count as not trying to censor every idea that disagrees with me? ;) But I'm not convinced. There have been plenty of racists with arguments they consider rational. I think they are factually wrong, but surely the real point is "what you are saying is offensive and immoral" rather than try to argue that (eg) the costs associated with keeping black slaves is too much for the income the bring.

Chris2048 9y ago
If a viewpoint is censored (or controversial), it is human nature to seek it out, end even compensate it with more "weight" than it might otherwise be given. This is why the latest in rhetoric is not to censor something, but to explicitly acknowledge it and damn it with faint praise (or claim it is mediocre, boring, denounced etc). Furthermore, another way to damn a viewpoint is to associate it with poor arguments; or to strengthen a claim surround it with strong (or at least battle-tested/accepted/familiar) arguments. You should be happy that a true claim is discussed, creating stronger arguments, and making those better known; and that false claims are also discussed, explicitly demonstrating the poor arguments used to defend them. Now, whether a poor/strong argument is recognised as such, that is another issue, and goes to the "rational literacy" of the general public, which certainly is an issue (on both sides).

jamesrcole 9y ago

A rational discussion of it does not mean defending it! As Aristotle apparently said "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." If we can't even discuss certain topics, if we can't even think things through, then we've entered the realm of thought police.

nl 9y ago
But if discussion of abhorrent ideas is enough to spread them, is the benefit of that discussion worthwhile? I ask this in a bit more depth here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14967029 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14967029
- jamesrcole 9y ago
  It's obviously difficult to prove any position on this matter, but I definitely think it's worthwhile. I think the idea that we should suppress mere discussion of certain topics is very dangerous, and could lead society down a very dark path. Let's not forget that things like interracial marriage, gay marriage and equality for women were once widely considered "abhorrent ideas".

Chris2048 9y ago

But there are no points, just topics.