I don’t share your intuition. This is why it’s probably best to pursue the truth. Remember, plenty of people were warning that society would fall to pieces of Darwinism were accepted. The future is hard to predict.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
There are, as Galileo and many others have argued, immense costs to attempting to shut down areas of inquiry. Those have to be factored into any decision. Silencing moderates won’t stop other people from discussing these topics.
0 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Are you suggesting that it's a good thing to base policy on information that might not be accurate?
0 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
You have things backwards. One has to look at the evidence first, and then decide policy. We can't suppress research based on how one imagine it might cause policy changes if you aren't 100% sure these policies are right to begin with. No one has 100% certainty of anything.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @KirkegaardEmil @Go321D and
As for educational funding, there is ample evidence it doesn't do a whole lot, but it sure costs a lot of money. Seemingly, you are committed to a policy of suppression of research that finds educational interventions doesn't work because you currently believe they work.
1 reply 1 retweet 6 likes
With your approach, one can get locked into beliefs that are false, and we have evidence against, but which is being suppressed. This is why one should not suppress research findings based on outcome based on predicted consequences. It's begging the question indirectly basically.
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.