Comment by lliamander
6 years ago
> I cannot stand the smug "we're objective academics that base our beliefs on nuanced logic and facts" of, to add insult to injury, self-declared "rationalists".
The rationalist community has that tendency, but they also possess a willingness to listen to people no matter how cooky/bigoted/ignorant their opinions are, and that is very humble and empathic. SSC is the prime example of that ethic.
> I think it's time for some introspection if this is all it takes for mainly young privileged [white] men to start considering race science and the likes as unfortunate but actually true.
Calling for introspection among people with whom you share some mutual bond or allegiance is fair. Telling strangers on the Internet that they need to do some "introspection" on account of their wrongthink after judging them on the basis of their race and sex is pretty arrogant and despicable.
> need to do some "introspection" on account of their wrongthink
Did you miss the if statement? If someone is on so shaky ground wrt their ethical boundaries that all it takes is some fancy wording for them to actually consider race science legitimate, they should indeed to take some time for introspection.
Anyway, according to your comment history you definitely fit the introspection mold. Zero surprises there.
> Did you miss the if statement?
No, but it's not clear to me what work that 'if' is doing. Is this just a purely hypothetical, or do you just assume the antecedent is always true? Do you perhaps take a middle path and concede the possibility people might be persuaded by "race science" for reasons other than mere "fancy wording"?
> they should indeed to take some time for introspection.
Or they could engage in dialogue with people who disagree with them but exercise good faith, which is exactly what happens on SSC.
> Anyway, according to your comment history you definitely fit the introspection mold. Zero surprises there.
If I aggravated you enough that you feel the need to dig through my comment history, I apologize. But don't presume to know my inner mental states. My tone is definitely hostile, but I consider it an fair response to your rather dismissive (and largely false) characterization a group of people I (and many others here on HN) have come to greatly respect.
> If I aggravated you enough that you feel the need to dig through my comment history, I apologize.
You did not. I usually take a quick glance on relevant topics to see if their are some obvious biases at play or if the user is just an arse.