That’s actually convenient for me, as I can address the readers with no regards to the screeching irrational.
Guys. When denouncing someone as belonging to an undesirable group in a public space, care must be taken to rationally back up your claim, as soon as uttered. Failure to do so causes more harm than good, because this failure increase the odds of false positive, and also provide a believable cover to the very group that you’re trying to accuse.
It’s like in the story of the boy who cried wolf. Regardless of his “intentions”, by crying wolf nonstop, he covered for the wolves invading the village - because people stopped taking claims like “I saw a wolf!” seriously. The guy above, regardless of his “intentions”, is effectively contributing with the Nazi, and IMO should be treated as such.
Nota bene: I simply don’t know if Dawkins is a Nazi or not. As such I’m not going to defend or accuse him.
That’s actually convenient for me, as I can address the readers with no regards to the screeching irrational.
Guys. When denouncing someone as belonging to an undesirable group in a public space, care must be taken to rationally back up your claim, as soon as uttered. Failure to do so causes more harm than good, because this failure increase the odds of false positive, and also provide a believable cover to the very group that you’re trying to accuse.
It’s like in the story of the boy who cried wolf. Regardless of his “intentions”, by crying wolf nonstop, he covered for the wolves invading the village - because people stopped taking claims like “I saw a wolf!” seriously. The guy above, regardless of his “intentions”, is effectively contributing with the Nazi, and IMO should be treated as such.
Nota bene: I simply don’t know if Dawkins is a Nazi or not. As such I’m not going to defend or accuse him.