Everyone on the internet has already told you to read @RottenInDenmark's excellent dissection of the "evidence" the Cancel Culture Cult uses to justify its hysteria. But I'm gonna tell you again anyway: read it. michaelhobbes.substack.com/p/students-sel…
Over time I've noticed that there are certain specific issues that cause normally sober, reasonable analysts to indulge in obvious motivated reasoning. And on some level I think they're aware because they also get very huffy & defensive about those issues. Of course ...
... this kind of thing is easy to see from the outside but difficult to see from inside. I'm sure there are issues about which I'm the same way! But some issues seem to really invite it. I would include Israel (which I'm not gonna touch). Meat eating. Cars. But ...
... I don't think there's any issue on which I've seen more smart people engage in more *obvious* motivated reasoning than this cancel culture shit. People who are rigorous & empirical in other areas will accept the goofiest anecdotes & the sketchiest "evidence" on this subject.
It's so evident that lots of people just have *feelings* about this & are out hunting for anything that will justify those feelings -- including people who rightly inveigh against that tendency in other areas of policy or politics. I have my thoughts about why this is ...
... but that's for some other thread. I would just plead with analysts to apply the same rigor to this subject that they apply to, eg, health care policy, where they would *never* base grandiose theories on a motley grab bag of anecdotes. Try to get some distance. That's all.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
