![]() ![]() Indeed, a central premise of the ‘rationalist’ subculture is a willingness to entertain and debate even uncomfortable premises.īy contrast, the thrust of the NYT hit-piece was an effort to blacken Alexander’s name by association with viewpoints deemed untouchable. The principal difference between the two worldviews is that the Silicon Valley version of this theology believes truth can be attained by reasoned debate between adherents. (I wrote about how this blind spot plays out in the worldview of OnlyFans superstar rationalist darling Aella here.) And both worldviews have a blind spot where it comes to the fact that not all humans are created alike, and some are more naturally advantaged than others. Both routinely assume consciousness is separable from the body. ![]() Both are committed to individual self-actualisation as a central social good. To put it crudely, both the Silicon Valley rationalist and New York Times worldviews are progressive in the sense of thinking humanity can be optimised. In truth it’s not really a contest between mutually incompatible perspectives so much as a dispute between different branches of the same post-Christian theology. After a power-struggle last year over the ethics of revealing Alexander’s name (which he won by taking the blog down) the New York Times recently ran a startlingly partial and falsehood-adjacent hit-piece on him, and Alexander has once again given as good as he got, simply by quoting his own writing next to the Times’ account of his views.īut it’s a mistake to see this conflict as an epic struggle between worldviews. The latest kerfuffle concerns the vindictive treatment of Scott Alexander, a figurehead of Silicon Valley’s ‘rationalist’ subculture and author of the Slate Star Codex blog. So far, I’m very much getting bang for my buck. ![]() I took out a New York Times subscription for the first time in 2020, mainly for the purpose of having a ringside seat on its accelerating metamorphosis from the ‘Grey Lady’ paper of liberal record to the Pravda of woke integralism. The NYT ran a startlingly partial and falsehood-adjacent hit-piece on Scott Alexander. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |