Sorry, that is not what I meant to convey. There are many reasons for doing things outside of pure logic and pure superstition. It’s not a dichotomy.
When I drink poison, beer for example, that’s not a logical choice, but it’s also not based on magical thinking. Pleasurable sensations and personal preferences are real things that exist. Doing something because it makes you happy is very different from doing something because your priest or guru told you to do it.
I do get what you are saying, and yes blind obedience to authorities in various circles isn’t healthy. But how does one moderate on such principles while maintaing free and open discussion?
How does one moderate on such principles while maintaing free and open discussion?
That’s a really, really good question. Any definite rules are tricky because there are always edge cases in human communication. Also, it shouldn’t be illegal to be wrong or stupid, so what can we do?
I think the only thing close to a real solution is good public education. There will always be stupid and dangerous ideas floating around. The best thing we can do is probably help people understand that evidence-based-policy works and magic doesn’t. (but I still think there should be moderation online to prevent blatant hate and violence.)
Sorry, that is not what I meant to convey. There are many reasons for doing things outside of pure logic and pure superstition. It’s not a dichotomy.
When I drink poison, beer for example, that’s not a logical choice, but it’s also not based on magical thinking. Pleasurable sensations and personal preferences are real things that exist. Doing something because it makes you happy is very different from doing something because your priest or guru told you to do it.
Carl Sagan does a better job of explaining it.
Ah fair enough.
I do get what you are saying, and yes blind obedience to authorities in various circles isn’t healthy. But how does one moderate on such principles while maintaing free and open discussion?
How does one moderate on such principles while maintaing free and open discussion?
That’s a really, really good question. Any definite rules are tricky because there are always edge cases in human communication. Also, it shouldn’t be illegal to be wrong or stupid, so what can we do?
I think the only thing close to a real solution is good public education. There will always be stupid and dangerous ideas floating around. The best thing we can do is probably help people understand that evidence-based-policy works and magic doesn’t. (but I still think there should be moderation online to prevent blatant hate and violence.)