Area for all other political discussion
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
 
By The Weeping Angel
Membership Days Posts
#542725
The Intellectual Dark Web ladies and gentleman.

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/08/opin ... k-web.html
Here are some things that you will hear when you sit down to dinner with the vanguard of the Intellectual Dark Web: There are fundamental biological differences between men and women. Free speech is under siege. Identity politics is a toxic ideology that is tearing American society apart. And we’re in a dangerous place if these ideas are considered “dark.”

I was meeting with Sam Harris, a neuroscientist; Eric Weinstein, a mathematician and managing director of Thiel Capital; the commentator and comedian Dave Rubin; and their spouses in a Los Angeles restaurant to talk about how they were turned into heretics. A decade ago, they argued, when Donald Trump was still hosting “The Apprentice,” none of these observations would have been considered taboo.

Today, people like them who dare venture into this “There Be Dragons” territory on the intellectual map have met with outrage and derision — even, or perhaps especially, from people who pride themselves on openness.
Is the Intellectual Dark Web a cadre of free thinking intellectuals prepared to challenge orthodoxy? or is it a collection of contrarian tossers?
 
By Timbo
Membership Days Posts
#542726
This is basically just "you can't sing bah bah black sheep any more" for people with polysyllabic vocabularies. This sort of nonsense has always abounded amongst various dinner party cliques, unfortunately the internet and a media with a narrative to support mean we now have to hear about it
Cyclist liked this
By Andy McDandy
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#542728
All those arguments boil down to "White hetero men don't get such a free ride any more, boo hiss". Otherwise it's as Timbo says, grunts from the park bench dressed up as intellectual arguments by people with narrow minds and good vocabularies.
Cyclist liked this
 
By The Weeping Angel
Membership Days Posts
#542731
Here's one of them Sam Harris discussing black people being less smarter than white people

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... bell-curve
Harris is touting a New York Times op-ed by David Reich arguing that “it is simply no longer possible to ignore average genetic differences among ‘races.’” Reich is careful in his claims about what is known as of yet. He says that “if scientists can be confident of anything, it is that whatever we currently believe about the genetic nature of differences among populations is most likely wrong” — a level of humility often absent in this discussion. He goes on to slam researchers who, discussing race and intelligence, claim “they know what those differences are and that they correspond to racist stereotypes.” I do not find this column as troubling as Harris seems to think I will.

The background to Harris’s shot at me is that last year, Harris had Charles Murray on his podcast. Murray is a popular conservative intellectual best known for co-writing The Bell Curve, which posited, in a controversial section, a genetic basis for the observed difference between black and white IQs.

Harris’s invitation came in the aftermath of Murray being shouted down, and his academic chaperone assaulted, as he tried to give an invited address on an unrelated topic at Middlebury College. The aftermath of the incident had made Murray a martyr for free speech, and Harris brought him on the show in part as a statement of disgust with the illiberalism that had greeted Murray on campus.
 
By cycloon
Membership Days Membership Days Posts
#542735
For me the whole caboodle can be put in a box, upon which sits a Fedora at a jaunty angle. I think collecting it into one group is probably doing the phenomenon a disservice (in a scholarly sense), but when I'm being lazy (99% of the time) it strikes me as a certain worldview seeking a voice, and dressing itself in 'scholarly rationality' as a way of being heard, rather than being genuinely scholarly.

See also: free speech martyrs mocking outrage by being outraged, conservatives hating PCness and advocating a mere alternative of the same, the bad-faith attacks on universities* (https://www.timeshighereducation.com/bl ... nfluential), and on. None of this is to deny certain issues et al, but they bind it all together into a narrative of civilisational catastrophe. Nah.

*a particular interest of mine:

https://www.parliament.uk/business/comm ... 7/inquiry/ + "Any inhibition on lawful free speech is serious, and there have been such incursions, but we did not find the wholesale censorship of debate in universities which media coverage has suggested.”

As ever, it's far more complex than these tools would have you believe.
Last edited by cycloon on Sun May 13, 2018 7:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
 
By Bones McCoy
Membership Days Posts
#542737
Ivory tower elitists who ought to try living in the real world.
School of hard knocks and uniersity of life didn't do me any good harm.
Now these edgelords are expecting a free lunch on the public dollar
Is what Dacre's columnists would churn out about any other "uppity" academic.
The Group of Seven

I dont think its reasonable to expect people force[…]

Derek Hatton

I didn’t think I’d ever say that! I[…]

Swivel-Eyed Loons

https://twitter.com/cj_dinenage/status/10978103902[…]

Paul Thomas Redux

A grown-up take on the story https://i.guim.co.u[…]