Geoffrey MillerVerified account

If you refuse to hear the strongest arguments against your position, you can't know whether your position is correct. Even worse, you can't even know the true nature, origins, and implications of your position.

True, but I can't help but to view this in light of your opposition to safe-spaces. Say you're a not white person and your position is "I am of equal intellect." You shouldn't have to listen to a white supremacist. We've all heard those arguments; no need to relive that pain.

The fact your mind immediately goes to ‘white supremacists’ when you hear the phrase “freedom of speech” is troubling and is telling of your character, not Geoffrey’s. I immediately think of ‘LGBT deserve the same as straights’ and ‘women deserve to vote’.

I made no insinuations about his character. In fact, I admire him. I (perhaps wrongly) thought he was referring to safe-spaces - which were initially created as places where old arguments based on race / sexual preference - would not be discussed. That's why I used that example.

He was talking about hearing other folks views when they go against your own so you can determine if you’re correct. There’s a reason cults and extremist religions dissuade their members from outside influence. It’s never to protect the person, but the ideology.

Yes, I understand that. Just because it is usually a bad idea to ignore conflicting viewpoints doesn't mean that it always is. My point was that some arguments, which have been debunked by all reasonable criteria, don't need to be listened to, especially if they are unsettling.