Apparently, plenty of people understood this tweet to mean Dawkins is in favor of eugenics. This type of mistake happens alot. Some people I know say that Dawkins should have expected/mitigated that. I disagree. I think it's the audience's job to work to understand the speaker.https://twitter.com/RichardDawkins/status/1228943686953664512 …
-
-
Makes sense to me
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
It's more than an “is-ought mistake”, Taleb also brings up the precautionary principle wrt Dawkins's tweet "he doesn't get dimensionality, complexity & teleology: Unlike animals domesticated for a specific purpose, we, humans, would never know ahead of time what to select for"
-
In other words, he is criticizing the "is" portion of Dawkins's tweet, not just confusing it for an "ought"
- 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.