Comment by tptacek

5 years ago

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make. You are free to speak. You are not free to speak in my house, as I have not invited you there. If I did invite you, I could attach conditions.

5 comments

tptacek

enoch_r 5 years ago

I'm saying there exist, in some communities, cultural norms that we treat ideas we disagree with with respect. We interpret them charitably. We don't make personal attacks on those who hold them. We assume good faith.

If you understand why someone might defend those cultural norms on Hacker News, then perhaps you can understand why someone would defend those same norms in, say, academia, or journalism, or publishing, or the arts.

tptacek 5 years ago
No, the fact that you're not welcome to speak in my house does not enjoin you against speaking ill of me outside of my house. I can't even comprehend the argument you're trying to make. The norms of HN don't bind on the whole world.
- enoch_r 5 years ago
  
  Let me try to restate.
  As I understand it, you're saying that people are advocating for the free expression of ideas - and yet, when people use that freedom to insult them call for their termination, they get mad. This seems contradictory and unfair to you. If I want the right to say whatever I want, then I have to accept that some people will choose to use that right to say things like "enoch_r is a despicable human being and his employer, family, and friends should all know about it immediately." Is that an accurate summary of your views?
  In response, I am saying that norms like we have on HN (such as the principle of charity) contribute to the free expression of ideas. If we didn't have those norms, people wouldn't feel free to investigate controversial ideas, or have discussions like this one, and the intellectual climate would be impoverished.
  Similar norms contribute to the free exchange of ideas in academia.
  The letter advocates for such norms to be defended in academia.
  
  2 replies →