>progressive dogma ... contrasting with conservative dogma
That's a false dichotomy and really the core of my complaint. Instead of dogma, we should be striving towards facts based on empirical evidence. Science.
That's a false dichotomy and really the core of my complaint. Instead of dogma, we should be striving towards facts based on empirical evidence. Science.
Further investigation (for instance, Shaun's video on 'The Bell Curve') reveals this evidence is faked.
Some of us have had our patience with this sort of thing eroded, over time. You cannot simply assert you have the evidence, you have the facts, any other interpretation is wrong, and therefore you automatically win. That ain't gonna fly, except among a subset of HN commenters and system-participants.
And their brigading only discourages the participation of those who still think all this is about exchange of ideas. In my experience 'we define the facts, the evidence, and use systemic means to stifle anybody who gets in the way' does not enhance the free exchange of ideas.