If views are common then they should be aired by good writers, so they can be disputed.
-
-
why doesn't this hold for factual claims like climate denialism?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Because newspapers shouldn't print demonstrable lies.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
if views are common then they should be aired by good writers, so they can be disputed.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
There's a distinction between reprehensible ideas and factually wrong claims.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
everything is both alike and disalike. the question is why the disimilarity is salient.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jessespafford @HeerJeet and
I get that one is a factual assertion and one is normative. Why only care about wrong factual claims?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Not printing lies is obvious journalistic rule. Normative disputes deserve airing.
2 replies 1 retweet 1 like -
you keep asserting this, but this is just begging the question against my position.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @jessespafford @HeerJeet and
why not give people the strongest version of climate denialism? Then you can have another article debunk!
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
A strong version of an argument cannot, by definition, be built on lies.
-
-
A strong normative argument can't be built on false normative premises.
0 replies 0 retweets 0 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.