Hacker News Reader

Comment by blinkingled | Hacker News Reader

The only sane response to this crap is silence. Stop legitimizing it by acknowledging its existence.

Kill an idea by ignoring it? Has that ever worked?

If someone stood up with a sign that said "all people named throwanem, their ancestors and descendants are stupid and deserve to be lobotomized" - will you diligently argue with that person every time you see them? I would not - I would ignore it in an instant based on its lack of logic and utility.

Shit exists, insanity exits, people can and will say what they want - doesn't mean every thing that's said needs to be addressed without regard to anything else.

Well, I don't know of anyone actually so named, so there's that. I also don't always accept an interlocutor's priors when they seem unlikely to support productive discussion, and argument from absurdity is one of those situations.

You seem strongly convinced that there is nothing more to be said beyond your own apparently firmly held view on this subject, and I respect that. However, it appears this view is far from ubiquitous. Does misrepresenting and insulting those who do not share it seem more likely to convince them than ignoring them does?

> it appears this view is far from ubiquitous.

So for you, validity of views has corelation with how many people hold it? I guess we can call that absurdity and stop?

I don't believe I have said anything of the sort. But if it's a matter of import to you that your view come to hold sway among those who do not currently subscribe to it, I should think you'd have some interest in finding effective ways to convince them. I'm not sure the methods you seem to be employing here satisfy that criterion.

Welcome to a liberal democracy, where we discuss ideas openly and allow them to flourish or die on the market place of ideas. Trying to shame people and trying to silence them eventually only makes the message stronger.

Let's be adults and have a conversation.

The same liberal democracy affords us the moral and legal right to not listen as well. There's no legal or moral argument to oblige others to listen or to make them captives to your words (heck, read SCOTUS on the matter, they side with me even in conservative times).

Reply on news.ycombinator.com