Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Dee's avatar

I can’t agree. It’s not naive to believe in free speech. The antidote to misinformation is more speech, with evidence and reasoning showing why the original speech was wrong - not censoring the original speech.

I agree that focusing on facts and reality is good, but the problem is that sometimes the truth is unknown, or unknowable. Sometime scientific evidence is open to interpretation, or has been manipulated. Sometimes people don’t agree on the definitions of words. No matter what standard you try to use, some set of humans with their own opinions, biases, and motivations has to decide what is “true”. Who gets to decide?

No posts

Ready for more?