Power Femme
How Do You Identify?: Cinnamon spiced, caramel colored, power-femme
Preferred Pronoun?: She
Relationship Status: Married to a wonderful horse girl
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Lat: 45.60 Lon: -122.60
Posts: 1,733
Thanks: 1,132
Thanked 6,841 Times in 1,493 Posts
Rep Power: 21474852
|
Sabine:
If it doesn't matter what the idea is, if the only thing that really matters is that there's a diversity of ideas, can you give me a reason why any given person shouldn't hold racist ideas? Can you give me a reason why we should prefer a society that does not have racial segregation over one that does? Not what the *law* proscribes but what we might want to prefer as a society even IF the law did not state it expressly? Can you give me a reason why we should promote tolerance over racism if what is important is that there is diversity of ideas? Because if what matters is that there is a lively debate over ideas then we should want a society where racist ideology is given a foothold. We should make certain that we balance out the teaching of tolerance with the teaching of racism so people here 'both sides'. We should, in our teaching, make certain that we do not favor either side--we should treat the ideas that all people should be treated fairly and the idea that some people should be treated unfairly as being functionally equivalent for one another.
I'm taking you at your word, Sabine, that the words you use mean what they mean--that what we should want is the maximum amount of diversity of ideas without giving much consideration as to whether those ideas are good or bad, true or false, factual or non-factual. So should we choose between tolerance and racism? If so, why?
Cheers
Aj
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sabine Gallais
I was a little shocked and disappointed when I first read this. Isn't the diversity of our ideas the cornerstone of our intellectual development? Isn't our lively debate over issues appropriately rife with diverse ideas? It would seem to me that if we subscribe to a few relatively homogeneous ideas, we're gunna be in deep doo doo. I appreciate all of the research and the posting of detail after detail after detail, but quantity does not necessarily outstrip other voices or their validity.
Who exactly would we appoint as the arbiter of what is good and bad? Should I expect someone to sift for me or should I rely on my own ability to do that? I'd rather do it myself, thankyouverymuch. I read, digest and take away what I find valuable. I expect everyone else to do the same. I can't fathom squashing other diverse viewpoints simply because I have questions. There is certainly no shortage of folks willing to challenge and debate the validity and the views so I'm not sure what you are advocating for here.
|
__________________
Proud member of the reality-based community.
"People on the side of The People always ended up disappointed, in any case. They found that The People tended not to be grateful or appreciative or forward-thinking or obedient. The People tended to be small-minded and conservative and not very clever and were even distrustful of cleverness. And so, the children of the revolution were faced with the age-old problem: it wasn’t that you had the wrong kind of government, which was obvious, but that you had the wrong kind of people. As soon as you saw people as things to be measured, they didn’t measure up." (Terry Pratchett)
Last edited by dreadgeek; 06-28-2010 at 03:56 PM.
Reason: removed the word 'not' in the fourth sentence of the first paragraph
|