I'm strongly tempted to disagree due to a contrarianism but this seems right. (I do wonder if there's really a secular trend here of any sort -- people in general have ever praised 'skepticism' while bringing out the knives for skeptics, & 'pluralism' while hating difference.]
People have always inferred values from disagreement... what's new is that the disagreement itself is assumed to pose an immediate & direct danger to individuals, that disagreement is *violence.* This is a big insight in @glukianoff & @JonHaidt's new book: https://www.amazon.com/Coddling-American-Mind-Intentions-Generation/dp/0735224897 …https://twitter.com/G_S_Bhogal/status/1038525087782240256 …
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
True, and that interpretation of "violence" is made possible by attribution of malicious intent to those who disagree. In other words, they see Evil. Manichaen dualism is nothing new, but it's been surprising to see it so thoroughly and explicitly embraced.
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.