which is more destructive to accurate understanding of the world, “whatever our team uses to advance itself is true” discourse or “whatever the other team uses against our team is false” discourse?
-
-
this means you can be trivially made to demand that your team treat clearly true statements as false or at least unsayable, which is the position that progressivism increasingly finds itself in, especially since the alt-right picked up provoking it as a fun pastime
Show this thread -
and of course anybody who answered option 4 is either a contrarian shitposter or an admirably unabashed cordyceps host, so it's nice to have numbers on those in my followers even if disambiguating them is problematic
Show this thread -
fwiw, a lot of people seem to be processing this whole set of ideas as if Our Team and Their Team were generally or even often making directly inverse truth claims about the same topics — Our Team is asserting A and Their Team is asserting !A — which is catastrophically wrong
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
That's what I voted.
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I think you are underestimating the danger of circular firing squads
-
Option number 1 includes such plays as "farmers should be able to smelt steel"
-
you do make a compelling point
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I picked 2 because it feels to me like saying something is false excludes a lot more possibilities than saying something is true (which it probably sorta is from some viewpoint)
Thanks. 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.