It’s only talking past each other if one party isn’t deliberately introducing the ambiguity. That’s what is happening here. It is pointless to substantively critique ideas that are expressed so idiosyncratically as to be incomprehensible.
-
-
Reginald Glenn ♨️ Retweeted Mark Koyama
They're not incomprehensible, his ideas are actually fairly straightforward and mundane - science, liberty, secularism good! What's happening here is a kind of left reactionary attempt to muddy the waters, summed up here:https://twitter.com/MarkKoyama/status/1003900282139373568 …
Reginald Glenn ♨️ added,
Mark Koyama @MarkKoyamaThe neglect of a well known example of the development of something akin to biological racism suggests something about the parochialism of the debate i.e. a fixation with Anglo racism in the Americas (as if it couldn't have emerged independently in another setting)Show this thread1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Britonomist @0youngbs and
Right, so again, I think the the issue isn’t so much whether or not “secularism good” as a questioning of the approach of “let’s just ignore any bad stuff while talking about this” and then attacking folks who argue for like acknowledgement of complexity
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @p_bone @Britonomist and
I think Thomas Jefferson has some good ideas about liberty, but it seems relevant to consider that his household included a bunch of humans he enslaved because of their race, and (factually) pointing that out does not necessitate a total rejection of everything Jefferson thought
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
But it just seems like a non sequitur - was his keeping of slaves something that contributed to the intellectual lineage of American liberalism? No. When discussing Newtonian physics should physicists explore in depth Newton's quaint views of menstrual blood? No point.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Britonomist @0youngbs and
You think that owning slaves is as far removed from liberalism as menstrual blood is from physics? That seems like a willfully bad analogy. At least go for the astrology belief man. But anyway, you don’t see a connection between slave ownership and, say, the Constitution?
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
I'm not American or any kind of expert on the American legal system. But the point is that intellectual traditions and original thought are distinguished by *new* ideas that set them apart from the orthodoxy of the time. 1/n
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Britonomist @p_bone and
So at least the (completely wrong, in my strong opinion) claim that racism was a *novel* intellectual offspring of the enlightenment doesn't fall into this trap. But merely pointing out that some thinkers still had orthodox beliefs certainly does.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @Britonomist @p_bone and
You clearly haven't read the article under debate. Please do so.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
I've read the article, as I said, it was damage control - ad hoc nuance added after the huge push back he received against his original inflammatory tweets.
3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Fun fact: a 2000 word article lets you make an argument in a more modulated & detailed way than a tweet.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.