ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags Facebook incidents , Facebook issues , free speech issues , internet incidents

Reply
Old 16th May 2019, 07:13 AM   #601
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,891
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
The original quote was "society benefits more by challenging it rather than censoring it".

To suggest that society benefits only if the racist's mind is changed is not only a non-sequitur, it is ridiculous.
Yes, it is ridiculous. Good thing that was never the claim, nor even the suggestion.

Here on planet reality, the point was that society didn't make progress on racism by "intellectually challenging" it.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 07:30 AM   #602
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,733
Originally Posted by ahhell View Post
While I tend to think that is the case, keep in mind that FIRE and I share a bias in that regard, they may be less likely to notice cases of lefty speakers being disinvited. I'd take there list with a grain of salt in that regard.
I'd be open to something less biased for sure. I couldn't find anything else and when I started going through the names on that unsourced list upthread with the word disinvited tagged on at the end, my results kept coming back to that page.

There is an opportunity to add to that list and if you have any examples of lefty speakers being disinvited due to pressures from the right then you're free to submit them.
Stout is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 07:31 AM   #603
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,733
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
It sure would be. Those of us able to share and live in peace would be better off for sure.

But I'm not talking about necessarily locking them up. What we need is a final solution to the racist question.
Wait what ?

Are you actually advocating, for or trying to incite mass murder here ?
Stout is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 07:40 AM   #604
Eddie Dane
Philosopher
 
Eddie Dane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 6,606
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
It sure would be. Those of us able to share and live in peace would be better off for sure.

But I'm not talking about necessarily locking them up. What we need is a final solution to the racist question.


Not making racism the top search result is a good start and countering those ideas with good information is a good next step.

I fell for the JFK conspiracy crap because -as a 14-year-old- I saw a documentary on TV that 'proved' it impossible to fire that type of rifle x times in Y timeframe.

All I needed was someone demonstrating very clearly that you can fire that rifle X times in Y timeframe.

Boom. Deprogrammed.

Thing is, I HAD reasoned myself into that position so I could reason myself out.

It's not just racism. If you knew nothing of economics and started searching for what to do with your savings, you'd be hit lots and lots of economic doom porn and in two days you'd be buying gold bars.
There are GREAT personal finance channels on Youtube, but people are just more likely to click on 'EXPERTS SAY; FINANCIAL CRISIS IN 2019' than 'How to diversify your portfolio'.

EDIT: oh, and mass-murder bad, Mmmkay?
__________________
Death to Videodrome! Long live the new flesh!

Last edited by Eddie Dane; 16th May 2019 at 07:42 AM.
Eddie Dane is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 07:43 AM   #605
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,450
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Here on planet reality, the point was that society didn't make progress on racism by "intellectually challenging" it.
I don't believe you.

You clearly thought that the goal of challenging racist views was to change the racists' minds.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 07:48 AM   #606
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,891
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
I don't believe you.

You clearly thought that the goal of challenging racist views was to change the racists' minds.
Whenever you'd like to discuss what I said, especially in the context of humanity's actual history of dealing with this stuff, that'd be nice.

Until then, what sort of intellectual challenge do you propose to engage in majority racist societies in order to benefit them?
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 12:40 PM   #607
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 15,494
Originally Posted by Eddie Dane View Post
Thing is, I HAD reasoned myself into that position so I could reason myself out.

And that's the key problem with irrational beliefs like racism, conspiracy theories, religious fanaticism, and so on. I've grown up most of my life in religious-right communities, and have seen personally just how resistant those beliefs are to reason and education.

Whenever one tries to counter them with science, it's the science that's wrong (Jewish science, Secular/Ungodly science, etc.). The "True" science is always on their side, everything else is a lie. And so on, and so on. Emotions are the only thing that convinces them, and they always have a justification for their prejudices. God said it, "it's just common sense", personal experience (post-hoc fallacy), appeal to authority, and so on. There is always a reason why their beliefs are right, and yours are not only wrong, but evil.

Just listen to any Trump voter, especially his Evangelical voter base, on the subject of Trumps many lies, his cheating, and his racism. There is nothing that they cannot deny or spin to fit their prejudices and preferences. Even when it's clear that they've been royally screwed over by his policies, it's never his policies that are the problem, there is always someone else to blame.
__________________
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams
"The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf
"Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon
luchog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 12:42 PM   #608
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,450
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Whenever you'd like to discuss what I said, especially in the context of humanity's actual history of dealing with this stuff, that'd be nice.

Until then, what sort of intellectual challenge do you propose to engage in majority racist societies in order to benefit them?
I'm not sure that I understand this modified view.

Is it your contention that once racists have put forth their poisonous arguments, that their effect on the public can't be mitigated by countering those arguments?
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 01:14 PM   #609
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 11,682
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
God said it, "it's just common sense", personal experience (post-hoc fallacy), appeal to authority, and so on. There is always a reason why their beliefs are right, and yours are not only wrong, but evil.
For believers, everything is what it is and the way it is because goddidit.

If you're being honest, you will understand that such beliefs are just one, massive, all-encompassing appeal to authority!
__________________
#THEYAREUS
The Mueller Report must be released to Congress in full - If Trump has nothing to hide, then he should also have nothing to fear!

Last edited by smartcooky; 16th May 2019 at 03:06 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 02:18 PM   #610
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,891
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
I'm not sure that I understand this modified view.

Is it your contention that once racists have put forth their poisonous arguments, that their effect on the public can't be mitigated by countering those arguments?
I think I might see where your confusion lies. Do you think that racists confine their actions to only making public arguments, and not acting on their racist views?
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 04:37 PM   #611
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 62,118
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
What we need is a final solution to the racist question.
Did you really just say that?
__________________
Self-described nerd. Pronouns: He/Him
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiarii?
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 05:21 PM   #612
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 35,020
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
I think I might see where your confusion lies. Do you think that racists confine their actions to only making public arguments, and not acting on their racist views?
I think it's probably a bad idea to treat speech as if it is the same as the acts that we imagine might accompany the speech.

If you want to prosecute racist acts, then you should probably wait until there are actually acts to prosecute. Prosecuting hypothetical acts on the basis of speech alone seems like a really bad idea.

And that's not even getting into the fact that none of the "nazis" under discussion have even spoken about the acts they've been assaulted for.

Whatever tenuous and creepy-ass connection you're trying to make between speech and act, to justify your own support of political violence, you still haven't even proven the speech itself.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 05:23 PM   #613
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 62,118
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I think it's probably a bad idea to treat speech as if it is the same as the acts that we imagine might accompany the speech.

If you want to prosecute racist acts, then you should probably wait until there are actually acts to prosecute. Prosecuting hypothetical acts on the basis of speech alone seems like a really bad idea.

And that's not even getting into the fact that none of the "nazis" under discussion have even spoken about the acts they've been assaulted for.

Whatever tenuous and creepy-ass connection you're trying to make between speech and act, to justify your own support of political violence, you still haven't even proven the speech itself.
Is there not something to be said for trying to prevent such acts from happening in the first place? Especially when such acts may result in the deaths of many innocent people?

Do we always have to cure, rather than prevent?
__________________
Self-described nerd. Pronouns: He/Him
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiarii?
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 05:33 PM   #614
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 11,682
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
If you want to prosecute racist acts, then you should probably wait until there are actually acts to prosecute. Prosecuting hypothetical acts on the basis of speech alone seems like a really bad idea..

What a great plan.

Shut the stable door after the horse has escaped!
__________________
#THEYAREUS
The Mueller Report must be released to Congress in full - If Trump has nothing to hide, then he should also have nothing to fear!
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 06:04 PM   #615
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,450
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Is there not something to be said for trying to prevent such acts from happening in the first place? Especially when such acts may result in the deaths of many innocent people?
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
What a great plan.

Shut the stable door after the horse has escaped!
FINALLY! The truth comes out.

This is not about simply denying racists a platform on Facebook. This is about thought crime. It is about prosecuting people for things they might do.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 06:11 PM   #616
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 62,118
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
FINALLY! The truth comes out.

This is not about simply denying racists a platform on Facebook. This is about thought crime. It is about prosecuting people for things they might do.
Oh, nice hyperbole.

If you had knowledge that someone was going to blow up a bridge during peak traffic, you'd attempt to stop them from doing that. You don't wait until after it's exploded. That would be horrible.

Similarly, if someone says that they're going to assassinate a political leader, you'd try to stop that. If someone is giving a speech in which they call for a riot, you'd try to stop that. If someone has given speeches previously in which they called for a riot, and they were booked to speak this afternoon, and it's likely that they're going to call for a riot again, you'd try to stop that.
__________________
Self-described nerd. Pronouns: He/Him
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiarii?
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 06:35 PM   #617
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,450
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
If you had knowledge that someone was going to blow up a bridge during peak traffic, you'd attempt to stop them from doing that. You don't wait until after it's exploded. That would be horrible.
Er .... in case you have forgotten, we already have laws against conspiracy to commit acts of terror.

The difference is that there still needs to be credible evidence before would be terrorists can be charged. Evidence would include things like meetings or internet chatter where the details are hashed out or attempts to purchase materials used to make explosives.

In your Orwellian world, a post in Facebook or Twitter saying "Somebody should blow up Sydney Harbour Bridge" would be sufficient to detain the author.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 06:44 PM   #618
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 62,118
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
Er .... in case you have forgotten, we already have laws against conspiracy to commit acts of terror.

The difference is that there still needs to be credible evidence before would be terrorists can be charged. Evidence would include things like meetings or internet chatter where the details are hashed out or attempts to purchase materials used to make explosives.

In your Orwellian world, a post in Facebook or Twitter saying "Somebody should blow up Sydney Harbour Bridge" would be sufficient to detain the author.
Really? Please point out where I said that or anything like it. Of course you need credible evidence. What you say you think I think is dumb. I don't think you really think I think that.
__________________
Self-described nerd. Pronouns: He/Him
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiarii?
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 06:55 PM   #619
psionl0
Skeptical about skeptics
 
psionl0's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: 31°57'S 115°57'E
Posts: 14,450
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Really? Please point out where I said that or anything like it. Of course you need credible evidence. What you say you think I think is dumb. I don't think you really think I think that.
If you don't think that then you only have yourself to blame if others don't get that impression.

You reacted to the statement "Prosecuting hypothetical acts on the basis of speech alone seems like a really bad idea" and implied that it wasn't a bad idea.
__________________
"The process by which banks create money is so simple that the mind is repelled. Where something so important is involved, a deeper mystery seems only decent." - Galbraith, 1975
psionl0 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 07:04 PM   #620
arthwollipot
Observer of Phenomena
 
arthwollipot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Location, Location
Posts: 62,118
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
If you don't think that then you only have yourself to blame if others don't get that impression.

You reacted to the statement "Prosecuting hypothetical acts on the basis of speech alone seems like a really bad idea" and implied that it wasn't a bad idea.
I reacted to a whole post, not one single sentence.
__________________
Self-described nerd. Pronouns: He/Him
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiarii?
arthwollipot is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 16th May 2019, 09:12 PM   #621
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 74,001
Originally Posted by psionl0 View Post
...

In your Orwellian world, a post in Facebook or Twitter saying "Somebody should blow up Sydney Harbour Bridge" would be sufficient to detain the author.
Actually in hindsight, some of those people should have been stopped.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 04:06 AM   #622
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,891
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
I think it's probably a bad idea to treat speech as if it is the same as the acts that we imagine might accompany the speech.

If you want to prosecute racist acts, then you should probably wait until there are actually acts to prosecute. Prosecuting hypothetical acts on the basis of speech alone seems like a really bad idea.

And that's not even getting into the fact that none of the "nazis" under discussion have even spoken about the acts they've been assaulted for.

Whatever tenuous and creepy-ass connection you're trying to make between speech and act, to justify your own support of political violence, you still haven't even proven the speech itself.
You mean taking action to prevent harm to others is a bad thing? Or taking action to prevent harmful ideas from spreading is a bad thing? I'm not clear where you are getting "prosecute" from, since we are discussing racist groups no longer having the privilege of using Facebook to spread their hate.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 05:53 AM   #623
Eddie Dane
Philosopher
 
Eddie Dane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 6,606
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Actually in hindsight, some of those people should have been stopped.
But not all.

My decade-old Tweet in which I suggested Britney Spears 'be sewn into a sack with several wild animals and thrown off a bridge' was actually a critique of her music, hilariously coated in dark humour.

I swear.
__________________
Death to Videodrome! Long live the new flesh!
Eddie Dane is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 08:53 AM   #624
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,419
There is a little tract called “DEFENSE OF THE INQUISITION”, it goes:
----------------------------------------------------------------
In true SJWs there is nothing to be seen of that moral and doctrinal laxity which the modernists qualify as "tolerance" or as "liberty of conscience." SJW’s maybe patient and merciful with repentant sinners, but never recognize any right of error and expose obstinate propagators of error to public condemnation. The Inquisition adopted an attitude toward heretics comparable to that of SJWs.

While SJWs may recognize the freedom of conscience of the individual in his innermost heart, if the individual is free, at the risk of his salvation, to refuse the faith, it does not follow that he can propagate his errors and thus lead other souls to hell. So, the SJWs respects the freedom of conscience of individuals, but not the freedom of expression of false doctrines.
-----------------------------------------------------------------



For this who are wondering, the actual text is below. It is illuminating how consistent humanity’s inquisitorial urge is over the centuries. The espoused cause may differ, but the self –righteous refusal to agree to disagree, the desire to burn the heretic rather than submit to democratic debate is consistent.


In the true Gospel there is nothing to be seen of that moral and doctrinal laxity which the modernists qualify as "tolerance" or as "liberty of conscience." Christ was patient and merciful with repentant sinners, but He never recognized any right of error and He exposed obstinate propagators of error to public condemnation. The Inquisition adopted an attitude toward heretics comparable to that of our Lord.

But if the Church recognizes the freedom of conscience of the individual in his innermost heart, if the individual is free, at the risk of his salvation, to refuse the faith, it does not follow that he can propagate his errors and thus lead other souls to hell. So, the Church respects the freedom of conscience of individuals, but not the freedom of expression of false doctrines.


http://archives.sspx.org/against_sou...nquisition.htm
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 08:56 AM   #625
I Am The Scum
Illuminator
 
I Am The Scum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,878
I'm failing to see a point there, beyond the ignorant strategy of "If I change the words on this bad thing to your words, then you look like the bad thing."
I Am The Scum is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 09:04 AM   #626
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,419
Originally Posted by I Am The Scum View Post
I'm failing to see a point there, beyond the ignorant strategy of "If I change the words on this bad thing to your words, then you look like the bad thing."
Because on a skeptic debate forum and more generally in society, people have decided that freedom of expression should be curtailed based on their particular creed.
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 09:13 AM   #627
I Am The Scum
Illuminator
 
I Am The Scum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,878
Sir, this is a Facebook thread.
I Am The Scum is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 09:15 AM   #628
Giz
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 8,419
Originally Posted by I Am The Scum View Post
Sir, this is a Facebook thread.
You might want to report the last 100 posts
Giz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 09:26 AM   #629
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,891
Originally Posted by Stout View Post
No, I don't report posts but I was wondering whether those people who do, did.

Go read the post for yourself to see whether I'm being "honest" in my characterization. It's not too far upthread, post #600.
I don't think your characterisation is honest, I don't think the post is saying what you claim it is, and so I didn't report it. See, you got an honest answer despite your dishonest framing.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 09:35 AM   #630
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,733
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
I don't think your characterisation is honest, I don't think the post is saying what you claim it is, and so I didn't report it. See, you got an honest answer despite your dishonest framing.
What ? You don't equate the "final solution" with genocide and mass murder ?

Really ?
Stout is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 10:15 AM   #631
Bouncing Bettys
Thinker
 
Bouncing Bettys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Bowen Island, British Columbia
Posts: 185
Originally Posted by arthwollipot View Post
Is there not something to be said for trying to prevent such acts from happening in the first place? Especially when such acts may result in the deaths of many innocent people?

Do we always have to cure, rather than prevent?
Curtailing freedoms, deplatforming, etc seem to marginalize individuals, push them into echo chambers, and towards radicalization. Allowing bad ideas to be expressed and challenged civilly is just one of the steps in changing minds.

If you wish to prevent people from becoming racist, I imagine addressing the underlying social and economic issues would be the best way to go about it.
Bouncing Bettys is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 10:35 AM   #632
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,891
Originally Posted by Stout View Post
What ? You don't equate the "final solution" with genocide and mass murder ?

Really ?
If that's your honest take on it, report it. As it stands you appear to be simultaneously claiming that it is not worth reporting and that it's one of the most egregious rule violations here.

You may see why I don't believe your characterisation.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 10:37 AM   #633
wareyin
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 6,891
Originally Posted by Bouncing Bettys View Post
Curtailing freedoms, deplatforming, etc seem to marginalize individuals, push them into echo chambers, and towards radicalization. Allowing bad ideas to be expressed and challenged civilly is just one of the steps in changing minds.

If you wish to prevent people from becoming racist, I imagine addressing the underlying social and economic issues would be the best way to go about it.
Ah, yes, civil debates do so much to change people's minds. Racism, religion, favorite flavor ice cream, all these things can easily be changed by civil debates.
wareyin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 10:58 AM   #634
Bouncing Bettys
Thinker
 
Bouncing Bettys's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: Bowen Island, British Columbia
Posts: 185
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
Ah, yes, civil debates do so much to change people's minds. Racism, religion, favorite flavor ice cream, all these things can easily be changed by civil debates.
You're right. If basic factors like reading comprehension can cause an argument to fail, what hope is there for civil debate.
Originally Posted by Bouncing Bettys View Post
Curtailing freedoms, deplatforming, etc seem to marginalize individuals, push them into echo chambers, and towards radicalization. Allowing bad ideas to be expressed and challenged civilly is just one of the steps in changing minds.

If you wish to prevent people from becoming racist, I imagine addressing the underlying social and economic issues would be the best way to go about it.
Bouncing Bettys is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 01:50 PM   #635
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 74,001
Originally Posted by Stout View Post
No, I don't report posts but I was wondering whether those people who do, did.

Go read the post for yourself to see whether I'm being "honest" in my characterization. It's not too far upthread, post #600.
post # 600:
Originally Posted by uke2se View Post
It sure would be. Those of us able to share and live in peace would be better off for sure.

But I'm not talking about necessarily locking them up. What we need is a final solution to the racist question.
"A final solution" is too vague to be actionable, IMO, especially in this context.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 01:54 PM   #636
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 74,001
Originally Posted by Stout View Post
What ? You don't equate the "final solution" with genocide and mass murder ?

Really ?
It can be, but it can also mean other kinds of solutions. And in this context I don't see anyone gathering up an army.
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 02:10 PM   #637
ahhell
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 2,363
Seriously? I assume it was just a dark joke but "final solution" in a discussion of far right groups and you really don't see that its a pretty clear allusion to "the final solution"?

I find this hard to believe.
ahhell is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 03:05 PM   #638
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,733
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
post # 600:
"A final solution" is too vague to be actionable, IMO, especially in this context.
Oh come on ! What do you get when you google the words "final solution" ? A cheezy song by a band called Europe ?

An upstanding and progressive poster has made the type of post that would not only get you banned from Facebook but a visit from the FBI as well.

Brain bleach
, for The Final Countdown.
Stout is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 03:50 PM   #639
Skeptic Ginger
Nasty Woman
 
Skeptic Ginger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Posts: 74,001
Your point isn't much of one. Perhaps if instead of irrelevant examples you posted examples of things FB has banned that you don't think they should have?
__________________
Restore checks and balances no matter your party affiliation.

Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 17th May 2019 at 03:52 PM.
Skeptic Ginger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th May 2019, 03:55 PM   #640
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 11,682
Originally Posted by wareyin View Post
You mean taking action to prevent harm to others is a bad thing? Or taking action to prevent harmful ideas from spreading is a bad thing? I'm not clear where you are getting "prosecute" from, since we are discussing racist groups no longer having the privilege of using Facebook to spread their hate.

Because in "Free Speech Racist" world there is no nuance. From the point of view of scumbag racists, bigots and conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones, a privately owned platform deciding that they no longer want to host them = censorship.

To racists, bigots and conspiracy theorists, "Censorship" means any reduction their Deity-given right to say what they like, where they like, when they like, and to spread their vile filth.
__________________
#THEYAREUS
The Mueller Report must be released to Congress in full - If Trump has nothing to hide, then he should also have nothing to fear!

Last edited by smartcooky; 17th May 2019 at 03:56 PM.
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:03 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.