This smells a lot like a Social Justice Warrior takeover of effective altruism. The idea of restricting free speech is particularly worrying. I would write a full rebuttal, but it might not be worth my time or that of others—the movement might already be unsalvageable (does anyone agree/disagree with that?)
EDIT: Replying to XCCF below: I don’t think there’s much in this post that doesn’t qualify as generic SJW ideology and talking points.
EDIT: Regarding the noncentral fallacy: I think this is a pretty central example of an SJW takeover from a pretty central SJW, but I’m open to new information.
I found this comment frustrating because I see it making the mistake described here:
...I think that if you identify with or against some group (e.g. ‘anti-SJWs’), then anything that people say that pattern matches to something that this group would say triggers a reflexive negative reaction. This manifests in various ways: you’re inclined to attribute way more to the person’s statements than what they’re actually saying or you set an overly demanding bar for them to “prove” that what they’re saying is correct. And I think all of that is pretty bad for discourse.
I.e. “rounding to the nearest outgroup” instead of trying to understand what Kelly in particular is trying to communicate.
Anyway, I wrote a long reply here where I took a first stab at differentiating between “SJWs” vs “diversity advocates I can get behind”.
I am also worried about something similar; that the social justice community has certain epistemic problems that I do not want to see us make the same mistakes in EA. So I’d like to encourage you comment on this issue, but in a way that is less combative, as you might then find more success. In particular, I would like to note that several people here have made critiques of part of the argument and been upvoted.
This smells a lot like a Social Justice Warrior takeover of effective altruism. The idea of restricting free speech is particularly worrying. I would write a full rebuttal, but it might not be worth my time or that of others—the movement might already be unsalvageable (does anyone agree/disagree with that?)
EDIT: Replying to XCCF below: I don’t think there’s much in this post that doesn’t qualify as generic SJW ideology and talking points.
EDIT: Regarding the noncentral fallacy: I think this is a pretty central example of an SJW takeover from a pretty central SJW, but I’m open to new information.
I found this comment frustrating because I see it making the mistake described here:
I.e. “rounding to the nearest outgroup” instead of trying to understand what Kelly in particular is trying to communicate.
Anyway, I wrote a long reply here where I took a first stab at differentiating between “SJWs” vs “diversity advocates I can get behind”.
I am also worried about something similar; that the social justice community has certain epistemic problems that I do not want to see us make the same mistakes in EA. So I’d like to encourage you comment on this issue, but in a way that is less combative, as you might then find more success. In particular, I would like to note that several people here have made critiques of part of the argument and been upvoted.
So it is “social justice warrior” ideology. So what? Maybe some kinds of social justice warrior ideology are good.
See: http://lesswrong.com/lw/e95/the_noncentral_fallacy_the_worst_argument_in_the/