This sounds a lot like you are lazily slandering someone in order to avoid having to treat them as a human being. I'm open to Scott being a dirty eugenicist. I haven't read his whole blog, just parts of it. Make the case for real.
-
-
Replying to @cowtung
Yes, that's what a low-decoupling conflict theorist does, keep up
2 replies 2 retweets 109 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @cowtung
Arthur Chu Retweeted Aster, internet archaeologist
If you're actually interested in receipts someone with more time than me to go through the laborious process of indirectly searching shit on http://archive.org has done sohttps://twitter.com/RiotAtArbys/status/1275505026824273922?s=19 …
Arthur Chu added,
Aster, internet archaeologist @ArsonAtDennys@AcausalG@davidgerard@RationalWiki Any of y’all want to do a separate thread on these or should I? Remember the ones? Pretty sure they’re on http://archive.org This was a “well aCtUaLLy the data shows the black race commits more crimes so it’s highly logical etc etc” https://twitter.com/ArsonAtDennys/status/1275504294796636166 …3 replies 14 retweets 113 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @cowtung
But, in general, I don't think it's possible to be passingly familiar with Scott's blog and not know that one of his hobbyhorses is "IQ realism" and biological determinism, and the distance between this and eugenics is at best a hairsbreadth
6 replies 15 retweets 214 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect
So there's distance between Scott and eugenics? So far my impression is that Scott isn't sure about IQ realism or biological determinism and is seeking answers in available studies. Is being sure that these are wrong and bad the prerequisite to not being called a eugenicist?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @cowtung
There's *rhetorical* distance, if the absurd wink-wink nudge-nudge of the "Kolmogorov complexity" thing was somehow actually opaque to you
3 replies 1 retweet 17 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @cowtung
Did you mean the "Kolmogorov option":https://web.archive.org/web/20200115140200/https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/10/23/kolmogorov-complicity-and-the-parable-of-lightning/ …
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
This is related to the whole "hide your power level" thing from internet Nazis. It's the same strategy. Scott encourages it in his community.
2 replies 1 retweet 11 likes -
Replying to @veronicastraszh @arthur_affect
It's just kind of weird that you'd bring this up in a thread about why Scott should be "silenced". So, does being careful not to say things that might get him silenced actually count toward the stack of reasons to silence him? Like, he was right about you, so he must be silenced?
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @cowtung @arthur_affect
I don't think he should be silenced. The NYT shouldn't publish his name.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
He should be afraid of people being mean to him because his views are shitty because that is what happens when you live in a society That is how a society defends itself from evil ideas
-
-
He can call it "silencing" if he wants (and he has built his whole personality around the idea that "censoriousness" is a great and horrific evil) but fuck him
1 reply 1 retweet 7 likes -
"silencing" jfc he owns his own goddamn highly popular blog he just doesn't want to be criticized for holding positions that he does in fact hold
2 replies 1 retweet 15 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
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.