This captures the problem well. “Standing the ground for truth and honesty” presupposes that you know the truth and that those who disagree are being dishonest (or willfully stupid). It’s not analytical, it’s dogmatic and ideological. With New Atheism, it carried a high price.https://twitter.com/BilboMichal/status/1174502933800587265 …
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @BretWeinstein
I was onboard with 'New Atheism' until 1) I understood the Simulation Hypothesis 2) I learned more about cultural group selection & adaptive functions of religion 3) I saw some leading New Atheists show the same kind of arrogance about other political issues (e.g. Brexit)...
16 replies 3 retweets 81 likes -
Replying to @primalpoly @BretWeinstein
Is the third point an intellectually honest way to evaluate an idea?
2 replies 0 retweets 5 likes
Replying to @Fil_Oliveira @BretWeinstein
It's a persuasion-relevant point in understand how alienating and counter-productive a certain kind of arrogance can be.
12:32 PM - 19 Sep 2019
0 replies
0 retweets
12 likes
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.