“People who support restrictive norms on conversations about race do so for partially epistemic reasons”—This is true and does score some points for the side wishing to restrict conversations. However, I would question how many people making this argument, when push came to shove, had epistemics as their first priority. I’m sure, there must be at least one person fitting this description, but I would be surprised if it were very many.
Point 2 is a good point. Maybe I should have divided this into three different camps instead? I’m starting to think that this might be a neater way of dividing the space.
“People who support restrictive norms on conversations about race do so for partially epistemic reasons”—This is true and does score some points for the side wishing to restrict conversations. However, I would question how many people making this argument, when push came to shove, had epistemics as their first priority. I’m sure, there must be at least one person fitting this description, but I would be surprised if it were very many.
Point 2 is a good point. Maybe I should have divided this into three different camps instead? I’m starting to think that this might be a neater way of dividing the space.