[ExI] extropy-chat Digest, Vol 237, Issue 13

[efc at swisscows.email]

Hello Ben,

On Sat, 10 Jun 2023, Ben Zaiboc via extropy-chat wrote:

>             like Catcher in the Rye, you're in trouble. You can't avoid the culture wars, except by resigning. Even the
>             sciences aren't exempt from this. Teach biology
>
>       Why?
> 
> Catcher in the Rye, To Kill a Mockingbird, Huckleberry Finn, and many other works, contain what the media coyly call 'racial slurs',
> and depictions of racism. This is seen as unacceptale now, by people of a certain disposition, and some of them are determined to

Ahh, but it is not unacceptable to me. I read those books, happily and
couldn't care less what other people think. No culture war as far as I
can see, and the people who are offended by what I read, say and think,
usually are so sensitive that they stop seeing me. I find it very
liberating and a great way to filter out friends from hysterical people.

>       X, Y chromosomes and biological sexes and evolution are facts or the
>       currently best know explanation supported by science and experiment. Why
>       wouldn't you mention it? It has nothing to do with culture.
> 
> I agree. The facts themselves have nothing to do with culture. But teaching them does. When you teach, you are doing something that
> affects the culture. Kids that grow up understanding and accepting evolution are at odds with those who have creationist beliefs.

Ok, I think I see your point here. If you define culture loosely as "a
bedtime story that may never be contradicted by anyone ever" then yes, I
think I understand what you mean here. I do not subscribe to that
definition of culture, so for me, and most people around me, culture has
nothing to do with science, and teaching scientific facts is not
contrary to any "culture" I might belong too.

On the other hand, people who do subscribe to that culture have every
right to do that, and live as they please as long as they let me do the
same. Lowering the quality of my childrens education is interfering with
me, so that I cannot accept.

But I guess this is where the beautiful concept of polarization comes
into play. ;) These nut cases start their own schools, reject science
and make sure that generation by generation their culture will wane
since they stunt their childrens intellectual development.

> Those who understand that a clump of cells is not a person are at odds with anti-choice people who think that women should not have
> bodily autonomy. Someone who points out that everyone has XX or XY chromosomes (with the occasional abnormalities, like XYY syndrome)

I don't think I'm at odds with pro life people when I point that out.
They might be at odds with me, but I am not at odds with them until they
interfere with my rights, or the rights of any females in my family.

> So acknowledging reality becomes a cultural thing, because there are people who refuse to acknowledge reality, and think that those
> who do are wrong.

Well, yes and no. But yes, given a weird definition of culture I think I
get it.

>       If you believe X, and someone else believes Y, I can choose to not
>       believe in either or take either side. Of course X can define not X as
>       Y, but that is just plain silly.
> 
> Of course, but there's no shortage of people who are just plain silly.

Agreed!

> How many people do you think understand that Atheism is not a belief that there are no gods?

Oh, this used to be a facourite topic of mine during my youth! =) Aren't
there many versions of atheism?

> I've lost count of the 'discussions' I've had with people, trying to explain that atheism is not a belief. There are many, many silly

Do you think there is a possibility of a god, or that the possibility of
there being a god is 0%? I'm always open to proof, but lacking proof, I
think it is way more likely that there is no god, and in a sense more
elegant to have only the universe, than the universe + 1 item (or god).
Usually I call myself agnostic.

But I also find the idea of a pragmatic version of religion interesting
and I wonder if that could be called belief, or just self delusion? ;)

>       The best course of action is to refuse to take a side, refuse to
>       acknowledge the definition of not X = Y, and get on with science.
>
>       Of course you have all the right in the world to believe that I'm Y by
>       being not X, but I do not have to accept that.
> 
> What you accept or don't is beside the point. Especially when you can be hounded out of your job by those who don't accept.

I do not think it is beside the point. It is the entire point.

What might or might not happen to me if I believe or do not believe X is
a different question. Most, if not all people here believe in science
and the scientific method, most, if not all people here would deny that
and profess to be devout christians at gun point. That is nto playing
along, that is being a victim in a criminal situation.

So refusing to take sides, and realizing that you do not have to play
the game is the only antidote to the game. Anything else, or playing
along, will just lead to an evil world.

>             I don't really see how business is going to be any better, either. You either avoid showing minorities in
>             your advertising and branding or you don't. You're damned either way.
>
>       Or you just show what ever people you want and refuse to play the game.
>       If you engage, _then_, you lost. By just sticking with science and
>       rationality, you will solve the problem in the long term. No amount of
>       culture war and wokeness can beat natural laws.
> 
> My point is that you can't refuse to play the game. Show whoever you want or not, there will always be people who are opposed to
> whatever you do.

And you let them think and act in what ever way they want to think and
act, and you do not acknowledge it. That is "not playing the game".

If you define the game as something that can never be avoided, and I do
not share that definition, then this discussion is kind of meaningless.
;)

> The culture war and wokeness doesn't need to beat natural laws, it can still get you sacked or worse.

Unproductive, inefficient ideas will eventually lose out, and be
replaced by more productive and efficient ideas. The soviet union
crashed, cuba is slowly opening up, because it is inevitable. Bad ideas,
eventually get replaced by better ideas. That is how humanity makes
progress. If that would not be the case, we would not be where we are
today.

Best regards, 
Daniel