Science must be abolished according to UCT students as it is Racist.

[G7PSK]

I have just seen this, and it made me want to scream. Essence of bull shit in its purest form, these people need a lightning bolt if ever any one did.

https://youtu.be/ZUPsGDFZzVM

[daqq]

One of the terms applicable here is "Nuclear facepalm".

[setq]

I can't even consider watching it as I only just replaced my laptop screen. Is this University of Cape Town? If so the following headline on SABC says it all:

"The University of Cape Town says lectures will continue on Tuesday, despite the throwing of petrol bombs and setting of fires on campus overnight."

 

[NivagSwerdna]

Bless

[daqq]

OMFG. What cult they were been educated?

SJW.

Be wary, reading about such people might threaten your sanity. In particular go read about safe spaces.

[crispy_tofu]

I saw this on imgur, copying some key points over (not my work):
Timestamps based on video: https://youtu.be/1i80qaETtw8

1- 0:50 "Science itself is a product of western modernity, and, the whole should be scratched off."  *Proceeds to pick up her tablet and starts browsing*

2- 2:50 "We have to restart science, from, I don't know, an African perspective, from OUR perspective."  (Because, as we all know, modern science is totally subjective. Yep)

3- 3:35 "There's a place in [location], and they believe that, through black magic [...], that you are able to send, uh, lightning to strike someone. So, can you explain that scientifically, because it is something that happens?" At this point someone interrupts her, saying "That's not true!". He is then asked to apologize for "[disrespecting the sacredness of the space]"

4- 7:30 "It was Newton, and only Newton who knew, or saw, an apple falling and out of nowhere decided that gravity existed, and then created, uh, an equation, and that is it." She then goes on to talk about how we should scratch all that nonsense that only makes exists in the Western world, and that it should be restarted from an African perspective. (Becuase things like gravity behave differently (or just don't exist) there? Idk I've been to a few countries in Africa, and it felt just like it does here in the States. I guess that's Newton's fault, though.)

5- 9:34 "Western knowledge is very pathetic, to say the least."

[HighVoltage]

The first YT comment:

"the people laughing at her restored my faith in humanity?"

[BravoV]

As Asia, South America, Eastern Europe and probably Middle East too are getting harder and harder to exploit.

What left is African continent, this is definitely a good sign for certain "people". 


/sarcasm:off

[setq]

Actually in Africa I understand they are pretty good at exploiting themselves. Look a the Niger delta history over the last 100 years for example.

Thanks crispy_tofu for summarising this so I don't have to watch it.

The individual is just thick as pig shit. It also shows how bad UCT admissions board is; that's the real crime.

[Rerouter]

I have only skimmed the video and picked up more info from the news articals linking to it,

Now anyone with a science background would agree that not everything can be explained completely by science right now.

But it really does explain the majority well enough that it leaves very little room to point and say "here be dragons"

Some bio-medical students could go to the witch-doctor see what plants / chemicals they are using and how they prepare them and see if they have stumbled upon something we do not know
That would be making the magic into science, it doesn't stop it from being magic to those that wish to believe it. it just removes the black box covering it to those that wish to understand it.

[dannyf]

I have just seen this, and it made me want to scream.

Racist things like that aren't new. People in the USA have to live with similar things like disparate impact for decades.

The key here is to recognize that being stupid is part of human right. and we all shall respect others' right to be stupid.

Otherwise, we are no different than them.

[iampoor]

I run into these people all the time. They are "unbiased" SJW types that complain about how everything in the world is racist, and how I should be ashamed of being white. They are the most intolerant group of people I have ever personally met. Under the guise of "tolerance" and "fairness" they want to restructure everything to gain power and privilege. Sickening 

 

[G7PSK]

I have just seen this, and it made me want to scream.

Racist things like that aren't new. People in the USA have to live with similar things like disparate impact for decades.

The key here is to recognize that being stupid is part of human right. and we all shall respect others' right to be stupid.

Otherwise, we are no different than them.

Being stupid might be a human right, but that dose not make them right and the way I see it is that it a duty of every one to try and educate any one who is stupid or dose not understand for whatever reason, it is the only way society as a whole progressives otherwise we would all still be in the dark ages. 

[EEVblog]

The bottom end of the intelligence bell curve.

[dannyf]

"but that dose not make them right and the way I see it is that it a duty of every one to try and educate any one who is stupid or dose not understand for whatever reason"

Isn't that exactly the same philosioph that Taliban, Isis and those religious nuts have? It is right for you if and only if they think it is right for you.

Freedom, on the other hand, is all about our own right to decide what's right for us. Individually. And including being stupid and being left stupid.

[G7PSK]

"but that dose not make them right and the way I see it is that it a duty of every one to try and educate any one who is stupid or dose not understand for whatever reason"

Isn't that exactly the same philosioph that Taliban, Isis and those religious nuts have? It is right for you if and only if they think it is right for you.

Freedom, on the other hand, is all about our own right to decide what's right for us. Individually. And including being stupid and being left stupid.

I did not say cut their heads off, although they might not notice but joking aside, I mean talking to them and explaining, trying to persuade by reasonable argument after all this is one of the very legs science stands on 

[CJay]

Bloody resource hogs, how will anyone else manage to get stupid if they hog it all like that?

[dannyf]

"I mean talking to them and explaining, trying to persuade by reasonable argument after all this is one of the very legs science stands on "

How's that from the religious nuts who show up at your doorstop preaching their things?

Fundamentally you are no different from them: except that you are preaching your religion of science.

Let other people chose for themselves. Let other people make their mistakes - it is an important part of growing up, for them, for the society, and for you too.

We as a society are far better off with young people trying things we think are wrong. Many of such trials will fail, but the few that succeeded propelled us forward.

So let free people be free.

[Ian.M]

The mental disconnect is amazing - how can anyone campaign against racism while exhibiting the stereotypical self-destructive behaviour that racists expect of their ethnicity?

The ANC did the indigenous peoples of S.A a great disservice by promulgating education boycotts during the struggle without organising equivalent instruction, and it looks like the legacy of the struggle will limit yet another generation.

[StuUK]

The bottom end of the intelligence bell curve.

You're assuming there was any intelligence in the first place to be on the curve.... 

[setq]

"I mean talking to them and explaining, trying to persuade by reasonable argument after all this is one of the very legs science stands on "

How's that from the religious nuts who show up at your doorstop preaching their things?

Fundamentally you are no different from them: except that you are preaching your religion of science.

Let other people chose for themselves. Let other people make their mistakes - it is an important part of growing up, for them, for the society, and for you too.

We as a society are far better off with young people trying things we think are wrong. Many of such trials will fail, but the few that succeeded propelled us forward.

So let free people be free.

I think you overestimate the human race's capacity for stupid. If you let the stupid succeed they make more stupid people.

The following film intro describes it nicely:

[EEVblog]

Only just read the video description:

As part of the "Must fall" movement, these students at the University of Cape Town say that "science must be scratched off" because it is "a product of Western modernity" (and therefore racist). When one white student tries to object, he is silenced and forced to apologise to the whole meeting. The speaker then says: "Western knowledge is very pathetic to say the least."

Wow, this is a "movement", there is more than the one stupid person? 

EDIT: Yes, there is:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhodes_Must_Fall
 

[amyk]

One can only hope this is an extremely elaborate piece of satire... but I feel like it isn't.

[dannyf]

"If you let the stupid succeed they make more stupid people"

A kind person would call that modern day eugenics.

It can be called much nastier however.

Human stupidity isn't exclusive to modern day societies and we have survived it millions of years just fine.

The risk today is the stupidity exhibited by the elites, by people who think they know what's best for the masses, by people in the intellectual ghettos that are Harvard or Yale or Princeton, or lse, etc. Those people are too well educated for their own good.

To those peopke, nytimes is the center and limit of their universe and nothing else exist.

Now, their chicken are coming back to roost.

And I couldn't be happier,

[EEVblog]

The mental disconnect is amazing - how can anyone campaign against racism while exhibiting the stereotypical self-destructive behaviour that racists expect of their ethnicity?

They are actually taught this stuff in their gender studies degrees I'm lead to believe
http://www.humanities.uct.ac.za/hum/departments/agi

[HighVoltage]

Idiocracy Director:
"It's Kind Of Scary How Quickly The Movie Became A Documentary"
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-22/idiocracy-director-its-kind-scary-how-quickly-movie-became-documentary


You you have not watched it, I highly recommend it

[elgonzo]

The bottom end of the intelligence bell curve.

...after mirroring it in the x-axis. 

[GreyWoolfe]

These special snowflakes are the leaders of tomorrow.  Thankfully, I am on the downward slide of life.

[MK14]

One can only hope this is an extremely elaborate piece of satire... but I feel like it isn't.

+1 (White science version, where 1 + 1 = 2)
-1%*££^%^$%$^£^^£^£ (Black Voodoo magic version, where 1 + 1 = %*!&%&%$%$ ^ 17E-6.2 +/- half a frogs leg)

[Ian.M]

They are actually taught this stuff in their gender studies degrees I'm lead to believe
http://www.humanities.uct.ac.za/hum/departments/agi

R.A. Heinlein characterised such 'studies' as transdisciplinary basketweaving a couple of pages into his 1980 book: 'The Number of the Beast':

D.T.B: 'Doesn't everyone? I have a PhD too. "Piled Higher and Deeper" '
.....
'Lets try another tack.  Tell me what you piled higher and deeper.'
Z.J.C: 'Let me think.  Flycasting? Or was it basketweaving?  It was one of those transdisciplinary things in which the committee simply weighs the dissertation.  Tell you what. I've got a copy around my digs. I'll find it and see what title the researcher who wrote it put on it.'

Which is how you get qualified faculty for a course in 'African Gender Studies' from those who couldn't cut it majoring in Applied Cultural Anthropology.

[Marco]

Human stupidity isn't exclusive to modern day societies and we have survived it millions of years just fine.

It was selected against for the most part, and when a population took a wrong turn the impact was limited.

If the US turns Easter Island, it will take the world with it.

[elgonzo]

These special snowflakes are the leaders of tomorrow.  Thankfully, I am on the downward slide of life.

I hope the only thing they will ever lead is the Golgafrinchan ark fleet...

[sainter]

If other universities manage studies the same as mine, science disciplines should come with laboratory studies. They are made this way, that the student could  test the theories he is being taught by himself, rather then just trust some guy that wrote something on a peace of paper.

Arguing with such people is fruitless, because they cherry pick fact that suit their needs and look at their phone ignoring you, when you try to prove them wrong. Everything starts going down the hill, when such stupidity finds it's way to place of authority.

I like one saying, don't argue with an idiot, he will bring you down to his level and beat you with experience.

[elgonzo]

If other universities manage studies the same as mine, science disciplines should come with laboratory studies. They are made this way, that the student could  test the theories he is being taught by himself, rather then just trust some guy that wrote something on a peace of paper.

Arguing with such people is fruitless, because they cherry pick fact that suit there needs and look at there phone ignoring you, when you try to prove them wrong. Everything starts going down the hill, when such stupidity finds it's way to place of authority.

I like one saying, don't argue with an idiot, he will bring you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Well, i would expect those people in the video do not come from a natural sciences faculty, but rather from from a faculty of Humanities.
Hmm, mandatory lab studies for Humanities, i really like the idea... 

[sainter]

Well, i would expect those people in the video do not come from a natural sciences faculty, but rather from from a faculty of Humanities.
Hmm, mandatory lab studies for Humanities, i really like the idea... 

As an EE bachelor I had to take Philosophy, social classes and other basic studies... so fair is fair, that they should take science lab.

[MK14]

If other universities manage studies the same as mine, science disciplines should come with laboratory studies. They are made this way, that the student could  test the theories he is being taught by himself, rather then just trust some guy that wrote something on a peace of paper.

Arguing with such people is fruitless, because they cherry pick fact that suit there needs and look at there phone ignoring you, when you try to prove them wrong. Everything starts going down the hill, when such stupidity finds it's way to place of authority.

I like one saying, don't argue with an idiot, he will bring you down to his level and beat you with experience.

I'd love to see a video made, with the main speaker in the first/original video vs Richard Dawkins. Especially when she talks about the black voodoo magic stuff, and the lightning strikes being controllable/controlled. Also the down with Science bits.

I was worried when I heard that South Africa would choose people for important job roles, based SOLELY/mainly on their skin colour (which I consider to be racism).
It should be based on the merits of the person and NOT on their skin colour.

I guess that the mods and rockers from the 1960's were frowned upon, by the older generation. So maybe this has happened before and is part of the way societies develop ?

[G7PSK]

Problem is that if left unchallenged this stuff can become mainstream and dominate a society. Look at the Arab world 12 to 14 hundred years ago the dominated science then after a certain element took over thinking and imposed their way of thinking by force they basically went back to the stone ages. You can say but that is religion, the fact is the religion was what pushed science originally. It was the fall of Bagdad in 1258 that allowed the reshaping of thinking by zealots such as are now being seen in South Africa today.

[CatalinaWOW]

Young people need room to experiment, to try new things.  To learn what works and what doesn't.  As most of us remember when you are that age you don't really believe what the older generation tells you about the world.  You have to learn on your own.

Where this has gone wrong is that the University has gone beyond providing them room, they have protected them from failure.  Which is a terrible crime.  Allowing failure in small things early in life is preventative to failure in big things later in life.  Where the failure may be shared by a much larger group.

[antonc]

Wow, this is a "movement", there is more than the one stupid person? 

EDIT: Yes, there is:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhodes_Must_Fall
 

Oh. My. God, is it a movement. I'm currently at the University of the Witwatersrand in Johannesburg, which is probably the epicentre of this bullshit (#Feesmustfall - but don't look, for the love of dog don't look). The special snowflake unicorn rainbow worlds these kids live in is scary, they have no understanding of the world, and no desire to gain any, either. Oh, and I'm also in the Humanities (well, as a PhD student), although I think I'm OK, I have a background in software and embedded systems. :-)

[G7PSK]

Even Worse the University is teaching this stuff. University's being allowed to teach things like this is partly what allowed 9/11 to happen in the US. The universities there were getting funding from the Saudi's for Arabic and middle eastern studies so they started down the slippery road of choosing lecturers that were approved of by the funders twenty or thirty years on and the people advising the government and defence are blind to what is really going on, so when a CIA agent notes that there are Arab men learning how to fly large planes but interested in how to land them the people at the top take no notice.
It is highly dangerous to just say they are young people and need to be allowed to make mistakes, more dangerous than allowing a 12 year old to poke around the mains with a 5 dollar meter.

[dannyf]

"which is probably the epicentre of this bullshit"

Not even close. I said long time ago that all thrbfounding father's will eventually be erased: some of that is actually happening right now.

But you may take some comfort in this: some years from now, our future generations will find things we take for granted today highly offensive.

Those righteous few will forever be remember for their "legacy".

[dannyf]

"Even Worse the University is teaching this stuff. "

Nothing wrong with that. If those morons actually believe in this shit, they will pay a painful price the moment they step out of their ivory tower.

If they happen to be right, we all benefit from their bravery.

Nature has its own way of dealing with this kind of shit.

[antonc]

"which is probably the epicentre of this bullshit"

Not even close. I said long time ago that all thrbfounding father's will eventually be erased: some of that is actually happening right now.

But you may take some comfort in this: some years from now, our future generations will find things we take for granted today highly offensive.

Those righteous few will forever be remember for their "legacy".

Yah, not wrong. Although just to clarify that I didn't mean the epicentre of the special snowflake-ness, but of the "#whatever must fall" and "decolonising" the university.... Whole new level of crap..

[borjam]

The mental disconnect is amazing - how can anyone campaign against racism while exhibiting the stereotypical self-destructive behaviour that racists expect of their ethnicity?

They are actually taught this stuff in their gender studies degrees I'm lead to believe
http://www.humanities.uct.ac.za/hum/departments/agi

My little grasshoppers, I would really recommend an amazing reading:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fashionable_Nonsense

It's not a joke, such a bullshit exists.

[Marco]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fashionable_Nonsense

It's not a joke, such a bullshit exists.

We used to call it philosophy.

[Assafl]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fashionable_Nonsense

It's not a joke, such a bullshit exists.

We used to call it philosophy.

Actually - in the past it was called science fiction. Science was never at the center - it was a mere deus ex machina ploy used to soften societal issues considered too taboo or awkward to be handled by serious authors with serious drama.

It became philosophy when the intent to abuse the concepts surrounding science became politically motivated.

I just wonder why she never summoned a bolt of lightning and hurled it at the offensive science student that interrupted her. What kind of a witch passes on an opportunity like that?

[borjam]

I just wonder why she never summoned a bolt of lightning and hurled it at the offensive science student that interrupted her. What kind of a witch passes on an opportunity like that?

That reminds me of an interesting situation regarding paranormal and other crappy stuff.

I remember a "witch" arguing against a skeptic on TV. At some point, the "witch" cursed the skeptic guy with a sort of Mother Of All Curses. Like your dick will burst into flames, you will die of cancer, lose your job, your kids will die, well, that sort of crap.

And it's very interesting because of what it says about the cursing witch. If she really believes in that stuff, what she did was even worse than shooting the guy (or eviscerating him alive). Assuming that she is not really a serial killer, well, one must deduce that she doesn't really believe that bullshit. Right?

Regarding that "science must be redone", well, Physics for instance is in deep trouble. They can even be awarded a Nobel if they can advance it and save us from the bondage fan theorists (string theory)

[bitslice]

The most appalling thing about this is someone actually apologised to the SJW for calling "BS".
If they permanently live in "safe spaces", then it just becomes an echo chamber of idiocy.

The same effect exists on Youtube as a whole,
Some simpleton will stare at the sky and see contrails behind a plane, not understand what's going on, and then blame Obama and the lizard people for spraying mind control chemicals over his house. Other people will pick this up and cobble up some dubious proof, which all the other simpletons then buy into.
"It's on the internet, it must be true".

I spent far too long trying to point out to some American guy online how flawed this idea was, but he maintained "there might be something in it" 

Another idiocy echo chamber is Twitter, where SJW's like to organise and try to put any dissenters out of a job by organising mass protests against an individual's company.

[madires]

If they want to be stupid, let them be. But prevent them from forcing others to be stupid too.

[m98]

What the? Aside from those stupid students, how could you ever come up with such a movement? Their arguments are just total nonsense that could be easily debunked by simply proofreading them.

[nessatse]

The situation is beyond ludicrous.  If  you want to get a glimpse of what is happening daily on campus, have a look at the updates: http://www.uct.ac.za/dailynews/?id=9938 


My daughter is a first year EE student at UCT, but campus has been closed for over three weeks due to the violence, and final exams are supposed to start in less than a month.  They will have to finish off the lab and practical work next year (if there is still a university left).  If I had the money I would send her overseas to study as I just cannot see things getting better.  These people want to destroy everything western and nobody seems willing or able to stop them.


And to think this used to be a world class university...

[MK14]

The situation is beyond ludicrous.  If  you want to get a glimpse of what is happening daily on campus, have a look at the updates: http://www.uct.ac.za/dailynews/?id=9938 


My daughter is a first year EE student at UCT, but campus has been closed for over three weeks due to the violence, and final exams are supposed to start in less than a month.  They will have to finish off the lab and practical work next year (if there is still a university left).  If I had the money I would send her overseas to study as I just cannot see things getting better.  These people want to destroy everything western and nobody seems willing or able to stop them.


And to think this used to be a world class university...

They will just end up turning the country into another Zimbabwe or third world country.

Example from same youtube channel as OP's:

[zapta]

I can imagine what will happen to the green line if they will abolish science.

[Sal Ammoniac]

Some simpleton will stare at the sky and see contrails behind a plane, not understand what's going on, and then blame Obama and the lizard people for spraying mind control chemicals over his house.

You mean like this?

[vodka]

The situation is beyond ludicrous.  If  you want to get a glimpse of what is happening daily on campus, have a look at the updates: http://www.uct.ac.za/dailynews/?id=9938 


My daughter is a first year EE student at UCT, but campus has been closed for over three weeks due to the violence, and final exams are supposed to start in less than a month.  They will have to finish off the lab and practical work next year (if there is still a university left).  If I had the money I would send her overseas to study as I just cannot see things getting better.  These people want to destroy everything western and nobody seems willing or able to stop them.


And to think this used to be a world class university...

Simply , they follow the ideas from the classics liberal preppies of the left-wing so dangerous as the Nazis. They  use the historical revisionism for trying to win old lost battle or lost wars by the hate and the confrontation.

Here , we have lived a several episodes as the retire the Franco's statues, the retire the Street names as "Millan-Astray" and the ridicule retire of the "Alferez Provisional(Provisional 2nd Liutenant)" monolithic or the retire of the tribute the 13 spanish priest shooted by the republic. All these passed for 80 years ago.

I don't strange that you want to send his daugther other place, because  i don't  strange that these new nazis will do a Cheka* on the university.

Cheka* an organization under the Soviet regime for the investigation of counterrevolutionary activities. It executed many real and alleged enemies of Lenin's regime from its formation in 1917 until 1922 when it was replaced by the OGPU.

[MK14]

Some simpleton will stare at the sky and see contrails behind a plane, not understand what's going on, and then blame Obama and the lizard people for spraying mind control chemicals over his house.

You mean like this?

Their actual channel, has some amazing intellectual/scientific/definitive findings and studies. 
The linked to one, has been able to work out a remarkable number of things, just by staring at the white static a TV gives, while it is not tuned into anything.
Apparently the government is doing stuff, in the "digital" realm. (If I understand the comments, correctly).

[AlxDroidDev]

The internet has come back to bite us in the ass.
What is more antagonistic than using the scientific wonders of our times (internet, broadband, AV encoding algorithms, Youtube, etc) to disseminate anti-science crap?

I hope Neil deGrasse Tyson or Bill Nye comment on this in a near future.

[dannyf]

"What is more antagonistic than using the scientific wonders of our times (internet, broadband, AV encoding algorithms, Youtube, etc) to disseminate anti-science crap? "

I don't know why you would find that surprising or offensive. Technology exists to facilitate free exchange of ideas, both good and bad.

Because many of the wonderful things we take for granted at sometime were deemed bad ideas.

If you only want good ideas to be exchanged, there are quite a few dictatorships you can live in.

[AlxDroidDev]

I don't know why you would find that surprising or offensive. Technology exists to facilitate free exchange of ideas, both good and bad.
(...)
If you only want good ideas to be exchanged, there are quite a few dictatorships you can live in.

I don't have any problems with that, Danny, but I find it surprising that the people speaking in the video don't. I really do! They are against science - which is what they are using to spread their ideas to begin with. If they really believed science should be banned, shouldn't they be loyal to their ideas and not use technology to begin with? If one's going to be so adamant about an idea, they least they should do is stick to their beliefs.

[dannyf]

They are against science

What's wrong with being "against science"? if you are a scientist, you should be against science. actually, you are required to be against science: that's how science advances.

and fundamentally, that's the only thing that separates religion and science. If you are not supposed to be against science, you have turned science into religion.

That's something many men and women of science apparently fail to comprehend.

[langwadt]

One can only hope this is an extremely elaborate piece of satire... but I feel like it isn't.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe%27s_law

[EEVblog]

Young people need room to experiment, to try new things.  To learn what works and what doesn't.  As most of us remember when you are that age you don't really believe what the older generation tells you about the world.  You have to learn on your own.

It's great to have an open mind, but not so open that your brains fall out.

[EEVblog]

They are against science

What's wrong with being "against science"? if you are a scientist, you should be against science. actually, you are required to be against science: that's how science advances.

Scientists aren't "against science"   
That would mean they are against the scientific method.
They in fact use the exact principles of science to advance scientific knowledge.
Terminology matters.

[EEVblog]

If you only want good ideas to be exchanged, there are quite a few dictatorships you can live in.

But demonstrably bad ideas need to be discouraged and ignored, and not given any respect or a platform on which to propagate.
Just to be clear, I am 100% for free speech, almost without limitation, that includes demonstrably bad ideas. But let those fools build their own platform to be heard from, they should not be given a platform in universities or in public debates etc.
Creationism is the classic example, Bill Nye should never have debated Ken Ham, that's just giving a global platform and credibility to demonstrably bad ideas that can only set back the human race.

[langwadt]

"What is more antagonistic than using the scientific wonders of our times (internet, broadband, AV encoding algorithms, Youtube, etc) to disseminate anti-science crap? "

I don't know why you would find that surprising or offensive. Technology exists to facilitate free exchange of ideas, both good and bad.

Because many of the wonderful things we take for granted at sometime were deemed bad ideas.

If you only want good ideas to be exchanged, there are quite a few dictatorships you can live in.

the problem is when some ideas can't be challenged because it is deemed racist, misogynist etc. to do so

[Macbeth]

Some simpleton will stare at the sky and see contrails behind a plane, not understand what's going on, and then blame Obama and the lizard people for spraying mind control chemicals over his house.

You mean like this?

What I don't understand is why she didn't go to the end of that little garden rainbow and dig up the leprechaun and his pot of gold? 

[edy]

This "Rhodes Must Fall" movement is a protest against the white dominance of the professors at the campus. Unfortunately here the baby is being thrown out with the bath water.

Rather than try to implement some kind of "affirmative action" and try to encourage a more diverse leadership and professors on campus (black, asian, white, men and women of all races, colors, creeds and religions)... they are rebelling against the institution's leaders but also what they are teaching. Science and math are the same, no matter what your skin color.

"Affirmative action" though is also a form of reverse racism. Two wrongs trying to make a right. They must also not lose sight that whatever diversity they try to actively create, that they pick people that are still QUALIFIED.

It's sad to see this going on, but there is a deep and long history of pain and racial tensions in that country. When times are tough, people are frustrated perhaps due to bad economy, or other issues, these tensions will come out and target whatever can be targeted.

I saw a video of them protesting in a Chemistry class. It looks like the attitude of students who feel like they are disenfranchised, in a system that will graduate them into an economy with bleak prospects, and having little confidence in the University or the establishment. That's what happens when there is lack of engagement, lack of communication, lack of student representatives and open dialog.

But at the end of the day, whatever politically the students manage to figure out with the leadership of the university and teachers, they need to ensure that academic quality and high standards remain.... otherwise the diploma/degree they get from the institution will be worth no more than toilet paper. If students are complaining that something is too hard, or they want to disrupt their education or make it easier to pass or get easier grades, that's going to back-fire.

[AlxDroidDev]

They are against science

What's wrong with being "against science"? if you are a scientist, you should be against science. actually, you are required to be against science: that's how science advances.

and fundamentally, that's the only thing that separates religion and science. If you are not supposed to be against science, you have turned science into religion.

That's something many men and women of science apparently fail to comprehend.

Scientists aren't against science. My wife, who's a PhD and has 2 post-docs, has articles on cell biology and immunology published on Nature (the most important scientific journal) and she isn't against science. She does, however, questions the current set of knowledge and that is what motivates her - or any other scientist for that matter - to try and see things on a new perspective, to experiment, to come to new conclusions, to find new things. And they do all that using scientific methods and protocols.

Questioning knowledge is healthy and should often be encouraged - that's where all new knowledge and science comes from, but there's a huge gap between questioning knowledge and "being against science".

By the way Danny, IDK if I've had the chance to post this before, but I really do appreciate your website and the articles you write. Thanks for that.

[langwadt]

This "Rhodes Must Fall" movement is a protest against the white dominance of the professors at the campus. Unfortunately here the baby is being thrown out with the bath water.

Rather than try to implement some kind of "affirmative action" and try to encourage a more diverse leadership and professors on campus (black, asian, white, men and women of all races, colors, creeds and religions)... they are rebelling against the institution's leaders but also what they are teaching. Science and math are the same, no matter what your skin color.

"Affirmative action" though is also a form of reverse racism. Two wrongs trying to make a right. They must also not lose sight that whatever diversity they try to actively create, that they pick people that are still QUALIFIED.

It's sad to see this going on, but there is a deep and long history of pain and racial tensions in that country. When times are tough, people are frustrated perhaps due to bad economy, or other issues, these tensions will come out and target whatever can be targeted.

a term like "reverse racism" is already sketchy, it implies that racism can only go one way and when it goes
the other way it is some how different

and affirmative action is a dangerous route to take, it can quickly become a loss for those it was meant
to help. i.e. people who are not qualified get hired just because they are a member of a certain group so
they are not taken serious and people of that group that are qualified are not taken serious because it is
assumed the weren't hired for their qualifications.

or companies will not take and chance on hiring someone from a "protected class" unless they are absolutely
sure they are overqualified because firing them is a legal nightmare

[doobedoobedo]

"Affirmative action" though is also a form of reverse racism.

"Affirmative action" is direct, absolute, racism or sexism or whatever.

It is action not on merit, but based directly on the colour of someone's skin or gender or whatever metric they choose.

[Halcyon]

Are you sure that wasn't a drama class playing a skit on "the backwards world"?! Is our next generation of professionals really that stupid?

 

That's it, I'm going to go live on an island by myself.

[MK14]

The following video, comes highly recommended by me. It has a real scientist, explaining in great detail, with very impressive visuals/graphics, how/why Science is a good way forward, and the video in the OP's post, is "nonsense".
I'm enjoying watching it. He is doing a really good job!
(It is also educational and rather funny in places).

tl;dr
Science/Scientist(s) to the rescue!

[Rick Law]

That young lady on the video, as part of her education, she needs to spend some time in tribal areas.  An area far far away from cities.  A area where tribal rituals dominates and is void of modern conveniences.

There, the first time she has to go to the toilet, she will begin to abandon her so called decolonize technology.  By the time she want to make dinner, she will realize there is no fridge nor microwave oven.  For dinner, she have to catch it first.  To cook, she have to make a fire without a butane lighter.  She would probably be hungry at least for the first few days, and then spend the next couple of days having a run with her bowel.  I bet within a month, she would have reassessed modern science and leave with a different perspective.

As she consider going back to campus hundreds of miles away, she would probably reject the mean of transportation passed down from generations and with no "colonial influence" - walking.  Instead, she would probably choose to use some products of modern science - automobile.

[BravoV]

That young lady on the video, as part of her education, she needs to spend some time in tribal areas.  An area far far away from cities.  A area where tribal rituals dominates and is void of modern conveniences.

There, the first time she has to go to the toilet, she will begin to abandon her so called decolonize technology.  By the time she want to make dinner, she will realize there is no fridge nor microwave oven.  For dinner, she have to catch it first.  To cook, she have to make a fire without a butane lighter.  She would probably be hungry at least for the first few days, and then spend the next couple of days having a run with her bowel.  I bet within a month, she would have reassessed modern science and leave with a different perspective.

As she consider going back to campus hundreds of miles away, she would probably reject the mean of transportation passed down from generations and with no "colonial influence" - walking.  Instead, she would probably choose to use some products of modern science - automobile.

That is too far .. why she is not wearing something similar like this ..

[Brumby]

I first allowed our intrepid SJW to have an opinion that existing science need not be accepted blindly - and if they wanted to prove it for themselves, then all credit for doing so.  (Not sure about the value in reinventing the wheel ... and fire ... and plumbing ... and electrical power generation ... and electronics ... and iPads ... as well as checking out ionising radiation, nuclear energy, radiation sickness, not to mention biochemistry and a few little bumps in the road - such as Thalidomide   ........ but, hey, it's their dime.)

However, one thing soon became a worry:  If any of their efforts began to support established scientific principles, then they would discard those findings - not based on an intellectual basis, but on a 'social justice' (ie. emotional) one.

I can't see how the end result of this type of movement can be constructive.



I believe Nelson Mandela, a person for whom I hold great respect, would be shaking his head.

[antonc]

I believe Nelson Mandela, a person for whom I hold great respect, would be shaking his head.

Absolutely, well put.

[HighVoltage]

For those who don't know, we have our own circus on campuses around here, the current show is gender identity. Apparently now you can say what sex you are and everyone must acknowledge you as such or face crimminal charges, if Bill C-16 passes.

UNREAL!
This is much worse than I though.
Where will we be in 20 years?

[setq]

Lots of SJWs dead after someone gets locked up for insulting one probably...

[dannyf]

various levels of goverment have put out job ADs that specifically say white males need not apply

Sad. But you have to agree though where we are today is in large part due to the various things prompted and voted in by the whites, in large part.

[dannyf]

but there's a huge gap between questioning knowledge and "being against science".

I guess that's more a question of semantics and definitions.

what your wife does is the thing that every scientist should do: challenge status quo and question what we take for granted. but there are a lot of intellectual ghettos where some "scientists" congregate where what your wife takes for granted is prohibited. Those "scientists" have murdered science and turned it into a religion where faith rules.

[setq]

but there's a huge gap between questioning knowledge and "being against science".

I guess that's more a question of semantics and definitions.

what your wife does is the thing that every scientist should do: challenge status quo and question what we take for granted. but there are a lot of intellectual ghettos where some "scientists" congregate where what your wife takes for granted is prohibited. Those "scientists" have murdered science and turned it into a religion where faith rules.

Climatology is one of them.

[amyk]

That young lady on the video, as part of her education, she needs to spend some time in tribal areas.  An area far far away from cities.  A area where tribal rituals dominates and is void of modern conveniences.

There, the first time she has to go to the toilet, she will begin to abandon her so called decolonize technology.  By the time she want to make dinner, she will realize there is no fridge nor microwave oven.  For dinner, she have to catch it first.  To cook, she have to make a fire without a butane lighter.  She would probably be hungry at least for the first few days, and then spend the next couple of days having a run with her bowel.  I bet within a month, she would have reassessed modern science and leave with a different perspective.

As she consider going back to campus hundreds of miles away, she would probably reject the mean of transportation passed down from generations and with no "colonial influence" - walking.  Instead, she would probably choose to use some products of modern science - automobile.

I was just about to say that! These people don't know how much the "modern world" helped them. All they think of is slavery and "racism".

On the other hand, a country developing its own technology is a good thing, but it doesn't mean thowing out everything "foreign" (and reinventing/rediscovering it later, much later.) Look at the route China took, for example.

[doobedoobedo]

various levels of goverment have put out job ADs that specifically say white males need not apply

Sad. But you have to agree though where we are today is in large part due to the various things prompted and voted in by the whites, in large part.

So you're into punishing individuals within a loosely defined group of people for something an individual in that group's ancestors may or may not have done. That could never end badly.

[G7PSK]

I was just about to say that! These people don't know how much the "modern world" helped them. All they think of is slavery and "racism".

Slavery was not a white mans invention, They traded slaves from Arab and African slavers who were at it long before any European's were including the Romans and ancient Greeks, go's right back to before the Pharaoh's .

[vodka]

I was just about to say that! These people don't know how much the "modern world" helped them. All they think of is slavery and "racism".

Slavery and racism is not exclusive to white europeans most of these culture at the time were doing it amongst themselves (some are still doing it). The europeans just had numbers and faster technological innovation and were able to conquer more land because of it.

On the other hand, a country developing its own technology is a good thing, but it doesn't mean thowing out everything "foreign" (and reinventing/rediscovering it later, much later.) Look at the route China took, for example.

A large part of the African continent is barely out of the stone-age if they were to actually do that they would never catch up with the rest of the world. They would condem the procedding generations to misery and poverty. In the current climate I doubt they would be able to independently prove gravity exist.

The correct afirmation would be that if the europeans hadn't colonized they never had passed of the paleolithic because the european invested very much money for building infrastructures.
Although they say that the infrastructures were builts for despoiling their natural resources , certain but they had to invest very money for studying for the project ,designing the machines ,extracting and processing the minerals, on resume THEY DO DIRTY JOB WHILE THE BLACKS ONLY WANT TO CHARGE , if you don't want that don't despoiling, study ,break the brains and work.

These sound too politic incorrect but its true, only you can see that after descolonization , the europeans left the civil infrastructures were intact and news. Today , the majority infrastructures are destroyed  by the wars and abandoned.
The farm industry  on Africa during colonization were flourishes . Now , the great majority the africans countries that expulsed or killed the whites and indians farmer are sunk.

But if the European are a bloody daemon, supremacists ,murders   and because they take the nuisance for jumping the walls or getting into half-sunk merchant ship for going to Europe.
Why do they run away the african paradise?Why do they throw to the arms of the bad europeans when they have their black brothers?

I was just about to say that! These people don't know how much the "modern world" helped them. All they think of is slavery and "racism".

Slavery was not a white mans invention, They traded slaves from Arab and African slavers who were at it long before any European's were including the Romans and ancient Greeks, go's right back to before the Pharaoh's .

Letters from Colombia : The Allah's slaves
http://www.alertadigital.com/2016/10/20/cartas-desde-colombia-los-esclavos-de-ala/

[tszaboo]

They have Universities now in Africa? You learn something new every day.
What I never understood, there is equality, right? Every color is equal. And then they come, and tell, that white man is bad, because white are racist.
And we are supposed to take it, and not point a finger, saying "No, you said the color. You are racist"

I come from a country, which never had colonies or slavery or discrimination for skin color. I'm missing collective guilt or sense of oppression. May I ask you: What is wrong with you all? Move on, these problems are solved.

[Macbeth]

Why would Africa not have universities? That's absurd. Just because the vast majority of the population are uneducated doesn't mean they have no requirement for education. Europe was like that too not so long ago. Unfortunately Uni's in the western world and the third world appear to be on a race to the bottom. We really need to get rid of the cancer that is "humanities" - if people want to intellectually masturbate then leave them to their own devices or take them into mental institutions rather than fund this nonsense from taxpayers money or give them a career in the establishment cliques they are guaranteed public sector jobs for life in.

[Dr. Frank]

I come from a country, which never had colonies or slavery or discrimination for skin color. I'm missing collective guilt or sense of oppression. ..

Je pense, la Belgique bien a eu des colonies, le Congo au moins.
Peut etre, ce n'etait si brute que les autres pays de l'Europe..

https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_colonial_belge

[CJay]

They have Universities now in Africa? You learn something new every day.
What I never understood, there is equality, right? Every color is equal. And then they come, and tell, that white man is bad, because white are racist.
And we are supposed to take it, and not point a finger, saying "No, you said the color. You are racist"

I come from a country, which never had colonies or slavery or discrimination for skin color. I'm missing collective guilt or sense of oppression. May I ask you: What is wrong with you all? Move on, these problems are solved.

You might want to do a little research about The Congo Free State and forced labour before you make assertions about Belgium never having colonies or slavery...

That is of course if your country of birth is Belgium

[Macbeth]

Big fan of the anglicised TinTin and Asterix books as a child. I'm not quite sure I remember this one though https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tintin_in_the_Congo

[Marco]

You might want to do a little research about The Congo Free State and forced labour before you make assertions about Belgium never having colonies or slavery...

That is of course if your country of birth is Belgium

It wasn't a colony proper when all that went down. It wasn't ruled by the Belgian government, it was ruled by a Belgian.

[tszaboo]

They have Universities now in Africa? You learn something new every day.
What I never understood, there is equality, right? Every color is equal. And then they come, and tell, that white man is bad, because white are racist.
And we are supposed to take it, and not point a finger, saying "No, you said the color. You are racist"

I come from a country, which never had colonies or slavery or discrimination for skin color. I'm missing collective guilt or sense of oppression. May I ask you: What is wrong with you all? Move on, these problems are solved.

You might want to do a little research about The Congo Free State and forced labour before you make assertions about Belgium never having colonies or slavery...

That is of course if your country of birth is Belgium

I just live here. I'm aware of Congo. I'm Hungarian.

[Bud]

Look at our PMs cabinet, people selected not on merit but sex or sexual orientation or funny headdress or skin color. Then we wonder why the idiots can't get anything done, because thats what most of them are idiots.

But that is exactly what the Puppetmasters want, don't they

[bitslice]

or give them a career in the establishment cliques they are guaranteed public sector jobs for life in.

This is why this issue is self perpetuating.
There is literally nothing you can do with a African Gender Politics "degree", other than get a job in government where you have the power to prop up the lives of other SJW's, and enact laws that prohibit dissent from the rest of the populace.

The UK Police now regularly look at Twitter to see if anyone is saying anything that might conceivably offend (somebody, somewhere).

[Macbeth]

The UK Police now regularly look at Twitter to see if anyone is saying anything that might conceivably offend (somebody, somewhere).

In the old days the top brass UK Police used to be members of the Freemasons secret society. Nowadays they are all "Common Purpose". I thought the old days were bad enough, but now the corruption is on a global scale.

[Rick Law]

They have Universities now in Africa? You learn something new every day.
What I never understood, there is equality, right? Every color is equal. And then they come, and tell, that white man is bad, because white are racist.
And we are supposed to take it, and not point a finger, saying "No, you said the color. You are racist"

I come from a country, which never had colonies or slavery or discrimination for skin color. I'm missing collective guilt or sense of oppression. May I ask you: What is wrong with you all? Move on, these problems are solved.

Of course they have universities in Africa.

Have you heard of Christiaan Neethling Barnard?  Did his earlier medical training at UCT Medical School, and further training from University of Minnesota.  Dr. Barnard conducted the first successful human-to-human heart transplant 1967.  (Why specify human-to-human?  Ah, there were experimental/temporary pig-to-human heart transplants as well.)

[TerraHertz]

I'm not going to watch OP's video, or read this entire thread. No need. The video is some unfortunate people whose early education has given them a fatally poisoned belief system, inability to think rationally and a severe case of ignorance. While this thread is smart people foolishly giving THE STUPID far too much attention.

Instead, I'll offer a few antidotes to THE STUPID. Randomly selected vials from the mind medicine cabinet. Take a quick browse with meals. The pain will soon be gone.

http://www.woodpilereport.com/
http://fredoneverything.org/
http://thesaker.is/latest-articles/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/
http://www.artofmanliness.com/
http://www.thisiscolossal.com/
https://www.thevintagenews.com/
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/archivepix.html
https://www.rt.com/
https://wattsupwiththat.com/
http://www.sssscomic.com/
https://earth.nullschool.net/
http://www.sciencealert.com/
http://datagenetics.com/blog.html
https://betterexplained.com/blog

Btw, what about those menacing clowns eh? What's the bet our friend George Soros has some money in clown hire, just like he does in 'social adjustment via paid refugee transport'.

[setq]

The first link I clicked and article from the above had an appropriate Hawking quote in it:

“We spend a great deal of time studying history,” Hawking said, “which, let’s face it, is mostly the history of stupidity."

[antonc]

I'm not going to watch OP's video, or read this entire thread. No need. The video is some unfortunate people whose early education has given them a fatally poisoned belief system, inability to think rationally and a severe case of ignorance. While this thread is smart people foolishly giving THE STUPID far too much attention.

Instead, I'll offer a few antidotes to THE STUPID. Randomly selected vials from the mind medicine cabinet. Take a quick browse with meals. The pain will soon be gone.

http://www.woodpilereport.com/
http://fredoneverything.org/
http://thesaker.is/latest-articles/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/
http://www.artofmanliness.com/
http://www.thisiscolossal.com/
https://www.thevintagenews.com/
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/archivepix.html
https://www.rt.com/
https://wattsupwiththat.com/
http://www.sssscomic.com/
https://earth.nullschool.net/
http://www.sciencealert.com/
http://datagenetics.com/blog.html
https://betterexplained.com/blog

Btw, what about those menacing clowns eh? What's the bet our friend George Soros has some money in clown hire, just like he does in 'social adjustment via paid refugee transport'.

Thanks! Antidotes to "The Stupid" are always welcome. Having an overdose of that over here at the moment...

[G7PSK]

We cannot be responsible for our ancestors deeds good or bad or their mistakes, we can look at them and hopefully learn though. The modern craze of apologising for our ancestors mistakes or wrong doings infuriates me, an article in the news last night was about giving pardons to homo sexual's convicted in the past under laws that were in place at the time, this seems absolutely ludicrous to me. The government of today was not responsible for the laws passed back then or the enforcement of such laws (all it can do is repeal such laws). Might as well give pardons to all the people that got deported to Australia in the past for pinching half a loaf of bread or the people who got executed for theft in the past where dose it stop all this hand wringing and self flagellation. If you keep on down the track of past mistakes or wrongs especially perceived wrongs to one self or nation you end up with the mentality of ISIS and Al-Qaeda.   

[tszaboo]

Of course they have universities in Africa.

Seems like, your sarcasm detector is broken.
I read scientific papers, so far none of which I can remember came from africa. Also, when I'm thinking about Cape town, I'm thinking about highest murder rates, not "hmm... I wonder what universities they have there". So they have some PR to do. This video is surely not helping that.

[VK3DRB]

She is right with one thing... equations are not the only way to explain gravity. We can measure it. We know how it behaves to an extent. But we don't know what it actually is.

[daqq]

But we don't know what it actually is.

Possibly African black magic?

[setq]

She is right with one thing... equations are not the only way to explain gravity. We can measure it. We know how it behaves to an extent. But we don't know what it actually is.

Yet.

[depeje]

What I never understood, there is equality, right? Every color is equal.

Legally there is equality, yes. That's about it. But when you look around there, you see every kind of job, or region has a fixed color. (Except for the little initiatives to create equality in practice.)

[dannyf]

"but why is it the white one who seems to be taking all the heat for past atrocities commited by a few."

Because many whites are prone to white guilt. Some white people were wrong then to have exploited others (African slaves in particular). Sone white people are wrong today to force the whole society of innocent people, people who have absolute nothing to do with the sins of the past, to be exploited through modern forms of racism.

Racism was wrong then and it is wrong today, no matter how "noble" its intentions are.

[Don Hills]

She is right with one thing... equations are not the only way to explain gravity. We can measure it. We know how it behaves to an extent. But we don't know what it actually is.

You mean I could wake up one morning to a news headline, "Law of Gravity Repealed!"?

[TerraHertz]

But we don't know what it actually is.

Possibly African black magic?

By the way, google gravity emergent property of curved space
I like this.

[MK14]

She is right with one thing... equations are not the only way to explain gravity. We can measure it. We know how it behaves to an extent. But we don't know what it actually is.

You mean I could wake up one morning to a news headline, "Law of Gravity Repealed!"?

Their new theory goes something like this...

WHITE = Antarctica = Earth = Full/Normal Gravity Levels

BLACK= Dark Outer Space = ZERO/No Gravity Levels

Therefore, given the divisions between WHITE and BLACK, this means that Gravity is Racist.

Since Gravity is an important part of Science, this also means that Science is Racist.

Since Science is racist, it means that All Universities must be shut down immediately and all Black students should be given lots of money and attention, because of the University closing down.

Anyone who disagrees with this is RACIST.

[vodka]

She is right with one thing... equations are not the only way to explain gravity. We can measure it. We know how it behaves to an extent. But we don't know what it actually is.

You mean I could wake up one morning to a news headline, "Law of Gravity Repealed!"?

Their new theory goes something like this...

WHITE = Antarctica = Earth = Full/Normal Gravity Levels

BLACK= Dark Outer Space = ZERO/No Gravity Levels

Therefore, given the divisions between WHITE and BLACK, this means that Gravity is Racist.

Since Gravity is an important part of Science, this also means that Science is Racist.

Since Science is racist, it means that All Universities must be shut down immediately and all Black students should be given lots of money and attention, because of the University closing down.

Anyone who disagrees with this is RACIST.

Shortly , they will invade with their Nucelar Engineers , yes such as sound "Nu-ce-lar" because the whites write and pronounce bad the word "Nuclear" .

https://youtu.be/9OCAL5ObBKU

[MK14]

That would be funny, sadly though it's pretty accurate in todays PC, affirmitive action and white guilt world.

It reminds me of some of the TV/movies that I watched from the 1970's and 1980's (and other time periods), which showed people in the distant future, doing similar strange/crazy stuff. Which to some extent is coming true today.
E.g. Woody Allen's Sleeper film.

I accept it is totally different (between now and those films), but in a vague, wishy washy sense, I can see a connection.

What the girl/student said in the video (OP), was WRONG about the witch doctors, voodoo black magic, controlling lightning, to directionally hit desired targets. Being impossible/disregarded as regards science.

She/they can (if they want), create the hypothesis/theory, that what those village people believe about lightning being controllable by voodoo/witchcraft, IS TRUE.
She/they can then go through the scientific process, and gather evidence that supports the new theory/hypothesis. Since she has (apparently) NOT done this, she has no business blaming science for NOT doing it. It is up to her and her group to prove it.

If the scientists using the Large Hadron Collider, want to come up with a new theory/hypothesis about science. They also need to go through the same process. It is NOTHING to do with prejudice/racialism or any other bias. We all need to do it.

tl;dr
Science is relatively fair and prejudice/racialism free.
Otherwise brilliant/famous scientists such as Stephen Hawking, would have been unsuccessful, because of bias towards severe disability.
Stephen Hawking, is a good example of science being unbiased as regards the individual(s) behind the new scientific discoveries.

Shortly , they will invade with their Nucelar Engineers , yes such as sound "Nu-ce-lar" because the whites write and pronounce bad the word "Nuclear" .

There have been a number of (usually BBC) news reports, where things have had to be changed (or seriously considered changing), due to complaints/pressure from certain minorities.

Example:
Innocent children's cartoon, where complaint(s) were about some moving visuals where they claimed it was religious/sacred writings. Despite the author(s) or similar, saying it was just random text. They were forced to pull the entire program.

http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/controversy-erupts-over-fireman-sam-scene-where-characters-trips-quran-881440811

[kxenos]

We cannot be responsible for our ancestors deeds good or bad or their mistakes...

Why can't or shouldn't you? And what does "responsible" mean to you in this context? ...<much philosophical stuff goes here>... so the main issue here is the merit, the moral value of the acts, but for sure we have to recognise the contribution of good or bad acts of our ancestors in almost all aspects of our life. But if we recognise such a contribution then ...<some more philosophical stuff goes here>... and so the right thing to do is

...giving pardons to homo sexual's convicted in the past under laws that were in place at the time...

Like Alan Turing for example. Again merit. Yes, that whould be a good start...

end up with the mentality of ISIS and Al-Qaeda.

Of course this is wrong for the reasons I've explained. You can't rectify a bad with an other one, and anyway they don't even try to do that. This is a totally different issue.

Hope that cleared that up for you 

[vodka]

We cannot be responsible for our ancestors deeds good or bad or their mistakes...

Why can't or shouldn't you? And what does "responsible" mean to you in this context? ...<much philosophical stuff goes here>... so the main issue here is the merit, the moral value of the acts, but for sure we have to recognise the contribution of good or bad acts of our ancestors in almost all aspects of our life. But if we recognise such a contribution then ...<some more philosophical stuff goes here>... and so the right thing to do is

Because i have to  excuse for the "Catalan Revenge*" and why  don't the greeks  have to excuse for not paying and  killed by treason to Roger de Flor, leader  of the Catalan Company.

It would have to be reciprocal.


*History of the  Catalan Revenge

  The bizantine king , Andronic II contracted to  soldier of fortune Roger de Flor and their Almogavar Company  for avoiding the Ottoman expansion. The Roger de Flor and his company infiltrated on ottomans territories  during  4 or 5 years ,where they begin to screwed  to ottomans and  they put looking  to ottomans towards the Mecca. At battles with a  proportion of  almogavars were  1 versus 4 or 5 ottomans.
When the Roger de Flor went to recieve the money , Andronic II contracted to the Alans for murdering to Roger. When the rest of his men found out his dead, they decided to raze all Greece during  almost a century . .

[langwadt]

What I never understood, there is equality, right? Every color is equal.

Legally there is equality, yes. That's about it. But when you look around there, you see every kind of job, or region has a fixed color. (Except for the little initiatives to create equality in practice.)

when you go beyond legal equality you quickly move towards a "equality of outcome" vs.  "equality of opportunity" 

[CatalinaWOW]

We cannot be responsible for our ancestors deeds good or bad or their mistakes, we can look at them and hopefully learn though. The modern craze of apologising for our ancestors mistakes or wrong doings infuriates me, an article in the news last night was about giving pardons to homo sexual's convicted in the past under laws that were in place at the time, this seems absolutely ludicrous to me. The government of today was not responsible for the laws passed back then or the enforcement of such laws (all it can do is repeal such laws). Might as well give pardons to all the people that got deported to Australia in the past for pinching half a loaf of bread or the people who got executed for theft in the past where dose it stop all this hand wringing and self flagellation. If you keep on down the track of past mistakes or wrongs especially perceived wrongs to one self or nation you end up with the mentality of ISIS and Al-Qaeda.

I suspect something other than an apology is due for forcing people to leave a cold, rainy and crowded island and go live someplace with a temperate climate and lots of room.  That is another problem with apologies and reparations.  Sometimes the offended parties have done quite well, better than they probably would have if left alone.  Sorting out what is "fair" is confusing and a waste of time.  Hard enough to figure out what is fair going forward.

[langwadt]

We cannot be responsible for our ancestors deeds good or bad or their mistakes, we can look at them and hopefully learn though. The modern craze of apologising for our ancestors mistakes or wrong doings infuriates me, an article in the news last night was about giving pardons to homo sexual's convicted in the past under laws that were in place at the time, this seems absolutely ludicrous to me. The government of today was not responsible for the laws passed back then or the enforcement of such laws (all it can do is repeal such laws). Might as well give pardons to all the people that got deported to Australia in the past for pinching half a loaf of bread or the people who got executed for theft in the past where dose it stop all this hand wringing and self flagellation. If you keep on down the track of past mistakes or wrongs especially perceived wrongs to one self or nation you end up with the mentality of ISIS and Al-Qaeda.

I suspect something other than an apology is due for forcing people to leave a cold, rainy and crowded island and go live someplace with a temperate climate and lots of room.  That is another problem with apologies and reparations.  Sometimes the offended parties have done quite well, better than they probably would have if left alone.  Sorting out what is "fair" is confusing and a waste of time.  Hard enough to figure out what is fair going forward.

sorta Muhammad Ali after his fight in Africa.  "Champ, what did you think of Africa?" Ali replied, "Thank God my granddaddy got on that boat!"

and while we are in the philosophical corner. A man rapes a women and they have child, should that child be guilty and apologize to his mom
that his dad was a terrible person? He clearly benefited from his dads crime, without it he wouldn't have been born 

[dannyf]

There are reports today that there was or is "intense" discussion within Facebook about deleting certain of trumps posts on the basis that they are considered "hate speech".

Decades ago, when hate speech laws were discussed, I thought it poses more risk to free speech than anything else. Unfortunately, it turns out to be true.

Let's see how long democracy will stand.

[dannyf]

"Hard enough to figure out what is fair going forward."

Absolutely. Our dear leader Mr. Obama likes to champaign everything under the notion of fairness, without ever being chanllenged by the press on what exactly he meant by "fair": is it fair to give everyone a chance at the starting line? Is it fair to start everyone at the starting line? Is it fair to weigh down some people so others can have a better chance at the finish line? Should some people start ahead and others start behind?

Without a clearly articulated and agreed to standard of " fairness", it is grossly unfair to advocate one version of "fairness" over another.

And that's precisely what some people are attempting to do. Deceiption at its best.

[dannyf]

A common theme in both the "racist" and "fairness" discussion is the lack of definition of just what is a "racist" or "fairness".

That ambiguity isn't without strategic thinking: a lack of clarity allows those with a microphone to shout out their opponents.

That's precisely what is happening in the world of PC.

[kxenos]

It’s been my experience that those who talk like you are usually ones who are

a.)   Sitting in a nice cushy cash for life government job.
b.)   Already made their own financial security and don’t mind if others now make the sacrifice so you can feel intellectually and morally superior. Sitting up on your ivory tower is a saying that comes to mind.

More hypocrisy goes here…

There is nothing stopping you or people of similar view points from donating your time or a certain percentage of your cushy pension (no doubt from the tax payers’ tit) to the poor unfortunate souls descendants whose ancestors were wronged hundreds of years ago.

Considering at one point in time pretty well every society or individual has had an injustice done to them when exactly would you like us to stop reflecting? I believe we learn from our past but to expect others to pay for things done hundreds of years if not longer before they were born is ludicrous. Trying to right a wrong done hundreds of years ago by actually repeating them against a group of people is also ludicrous. Sometimes people just get away with shit, live their life and die and therefore can’t be punished, that’s the way it goes sometimes it’s not right but its reality. Punishing others for it is just wrong.

More doses of reality go here…

Oh, nice. I'll tell you who the hypocrite is here. You attack me instead of the argument you

The fact that I was a government employee is true and stated at my first post in this blog. The vast amounts of money government employees receive in Greece and most other countries in the world is also well-known. But one point you make is I didn't earn it as painfully as you maybe? Not that it makes any of this any better, or makes any difference in this discussion but I started working when I was 14y.o as a carpenter and I continued working while going to high-school, university and master's deg. while learning English and German. So, no Ahmed, I didn't have an easy life and my startup is too small to have any financial security.

I made a comment that indicated (I'm pointing this out because obviously you're incapable of understanding it) that these subjects are difficult philosophical ones with no easy definitive answer.
But here goes the main part of this reply to indicate who is the hypocrite here...
I didn't wrote about any recuperations, and I didn't ask you or anybody else to pay-back money to anyone but the mere fact that you subconsciously correlate whether a historic fact is right or wrong to the financial expenses it might put you into, this, my friend, is a fucking hypocritical thing to do.

In the article you link to, there is the opinion that we don't owe to black people even if we have dragged them here, because this action helped them out and benefited them and their children in the long run. This is an other hypocritical idea because it tries to assign moral value (we benefited them) to an action (us bringing blacks in America) where there is none. And there is none because what counts for the morality of an action is the telos, the end, the goal or the reason or the purpose of the action.

See Ahmed, opinions are like assholes...everybody has one. I didn't show you mine until you asked for it. Please try to hide yours

Still, if you're interested in having a polite, civilized conversation WITH ARGUMENTS like grown ups and WITHOUT calling names at each other and accusing the other that is hypocrite or unrealistic or of views that he never expressed, I would gladly part-take into it.
Regards

[Cerebus]

We cannot be responsible for our ancestors deeds good or bad or their mistakes, we can look at them and hopefully learn though. The modern craze of apologising for our ancestors mistakes or wrong doings infuriates me, an article in the news last night was about giving pardons to homo sexual's convicted in the past under laws that were in place at the time, this seems absolutely ludicrous to me. The government of today was not responsible for the laws passed back then or the enforcement of such laws (all it can do is repeal such laws). Might as well give pardons to all the people that got deported to Australia in the past for pinching half a loaf of bread or the people who got executed for theft in the past where dose it stop all this hand wringing and self flagellation. If you keep on down the track of past mistakes or wrongs especially perceived wrongs to one self or nation you end up with the mentality of ISIS and Al-Qaeda.

A pardon is not an apology. A pardon removes a criminal conviction as if it was not there. The pardons are for living people only. It wouldn't seem ludicrous to you if it was you who had a criminal record for a sexual offence that is not an offence nowadays and the vast majority would argue should never have been. Would you really be happy to have a criminal record for "gross indecency with a minor" for having sex that is nowadays lawful? The state formally 'forgiving' past offences is a very different thing from what you're complaining about (with which I largely agree as it happens).

[timb]

Example:
Innocent children's cartoon, where complaint(s) were about some moving visuals where they claimed it was religious/sacred writings. Despite the author(s) or similar, saying it was just random text. They were forced to pull the entire program.

http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/controversy-erupts-over-fireman-sam-scene-where-characters-trips-quran-881440811

Huh. I didn't know Dave created children's television shows too... Where does he find the time?M

Fireman Sam creator David Jones has previously found himself under fire after he was held for questioning for asking why a veiled woman was allowed through airport security without being checked.

Dave has had quite a career:

Singer/Pop Icon (People say he monkeys around...)
TV Show Creator/Producer
Electronics Engineer
Writer
Internet Dating Expert
and Closet Racist!

[dannyf]

"This is an other hypocritical idea "

I have a perfect solution for this. You think it is the right thing to do to offer restitution to descendants of former slaves and others don't.

I support your right to offer restitution 100 percent. Just as I think unfair for others to deny your right to offer rrstituion, I think it also unfair for you to force others to pay rrstituion.

Then why don't we unite in supporting s involuntary tax on those who support restituion? That way, you are able to retain the ability to offer restituion and others don't get forced to pay restitution they don't wish to pay.

A win-win situation.

So why are you hesitating for?

[dannyf]

Deep down, I suspect that you aren't interested in offering restituion to those harmed by slavery, as much as you are interested in offering restitution out of other peoples pockets.

That is the hypocracy here.

[MK14]

Example:
Innocent children's cartoon, where complaint(s) were about some moving visuals where they claimed it was religious/sacred writings. Despite the author(s) or similar, saying it was just random text. They were forced to pull the entire program.

http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/controversy-erupts-over-fireman-sam-scene-where-characters-trips-quran-881440811

Huh. I didn't know Dave created children's television shows too... Where does he find the time?M

Fireman Sam creator David Jones has previously found himself under fire after he was held for questioning for asking why a veiled woman was allowed through airport security without being checked.

Dave has had quite a career:

Singer/Pop Icon (People say he monkeys around...)
TV Show Creator/Producer
Electronics Engineer
Writer
Internet Dating Expert
and Closet Racist!

When I read through your post, I could NOT understand it. I assumed I had messed up, or you were joking or something.

I actually read through that part, and did NOT notice he was called "David Jones", wow!
I was reading very quickly, I guess.

Except that "Jones" is a very common surname in the UK (especial Wales I believe).

Well spotted!
You had me fooled for a while. I thought you were mixed up and thought I was talking about an EEVblog video 

 

[timb]

Example:
Innocent children's cartoon, where complaint(s) were about some moving visuals where they claimed it was religious/sacred writings. Despite the author(s) or similar, saying it was just random text. They were forced to pull the entire program.

http://www.middleeasteye.net/news/controversy-erupts-over-fireman-sam-scene-where-characters-trips-quran-881440811

Huh. I didn't know Dave created children's television shows too... Where does he find the time?M

Fireman Sam creator David Jones has previously found himself under fire after he was held for questioning for asking why a veiled woman was allowed through airport security without being checked.

Dave has had quite a career:

Singer/Pop Icon (People say he monkeys around...)
TV Show Creator/Producer
Electronics Engineer
Writer
Internet Dating Expert
and Closet Racist!

When I read through your post, I could NOT understand it. I assumed I had messed up, or you were joking or something.

I actually read through that part, and did NOT notice he was called "David Jones", wow!
I was reading very quickly, I guess.

Except that "Jones" is a very common surname in the UK (especial Wales I believe).

Well spotted!
You had me fooled for a while. I thought you were mixed up and thought I was talking about an EEVblog video 

 

XD

Yes, David Jones seems to be quite a common name. I see it all over the place!

(Hence my list above, combining Davy Jones from the 1960's band The Monkees, David Jones the "racist, Fireman Sam" creator and our David L. Jones, Engineer/Internet Dating Expert!)

[MK14]

XD

Yes, David Jones seems to be quite a common name. I see it all over the place!

(Hence my list above, combining Davy Jones from the 1960's band The Monkees, David Jones the "racist, Fireman Sam" creator and our David L. Jones, Engineer/Internet Dating Expert!)

If I remember correctly, "our" "David Jones", was/is an Internet Dating Expert!.
So you fooled me again 

Because I thought most of the list was valid (Internet dating expert, Engineer, TV Show Creator/Producer (A possible exaggeration of his YouTube success's), and Writer (I have read or seen some of the thing(s) he has written on the Internet, e.g. A PCB guide) ).
I can't 100% accurately remember my thoughts, but this paragraph is roughly right. But my thoughts were probably a bit different in practice. The basic gist is at least somewhat right/correct, anyway.

tl;dr
I thought most of the list was valid, so assumed the missing bits were either something I did not know about our "David Jones", or you were mixing in things from the guy caught at the airport and who did the fireman cartoons.

Final excuse: I had not heard of the "David Jones" from the 1960's (I actually like the monkeys music, so double  ) 

Anyway I'll stop digging my own hole (it's already big enough to hide in), otherwise one of the other "David Jones's", will join this forum, just to mock my ignorance and foolishness, in my last couple of posts in this thread.

[Rick Law]

Of course they have universities in Africa.

Seems like, your sarcasm detector is broken.
I read scientific papers, so far none of which I can remember came from africa. Also, when I'm thinking about Cape town, I'm thinking about highest murder rates, not "hmm... I wonder what universities they have there". So they have some PR to do. This video is surely not helping that.

Probably so!  My apologies.

I am rather disappointed with how most universities are behaving these days.  My mind was clogged.

[kxenos]

Oh, nice. I'll tell you who the hypocrite is here. You attack me instead of the argument you

Spare me you were condescending and elitist in your reply.

What do you mean when you say we brought them here? Are you 400 years old? I never brought anyone here, people who lived here 3-400 years ago did, I didn’t.

Yes I place a monetary value on it, grow up everything is about money it’s how you feed and clothe yourself. Money is also what the people who are screaming racism and discrimination also want.

Did you also read in the article that slavery crossed all races and that in fact the Africans were doing it amongst themselves? Did you also read that it was the west that eventually took a stand against slavery? You do also know slavery still goes on, in Africa especially?

Oh come on, the "Hope that cleared that up for you" epilogue wasn't elitist! It was a sarcastic comment about myself writing a full paragraph of text without saying actually nothing. It's like I'm saying "I know my post didn't contribute anything to the discussion and that's because these subjects are too difficult for me." Is it better now?
Well, I'm not interested in the monetary value of these things. And it's not elitist's or rich persons view. It's who I am, really. If something is right according to my version of ethics, it's right. And if it's wrong it's wrong. How much money will I earn or pay, or how much prison time I will serve is not relevant in my deciding about the moral value of an action. But of course the benefit or the pay should also be just according to the good or the bad thing I did.
Somehow, even if I'm not 400y.o and I don't feel I've done something wrong, I feel morally obligated to take some responsibility about my father's wrong doings. Just because I'm the closest relative - descendant he has. But you know what? If I could decide about the issue of African-Americans, I wouldn't give them money. I would give them firstly an apology (costs nothing), then good schools and the best teachers and equal opportunities in succeeding (what danny says, mockingly, but without actually contributing anything, as always) and sign (as a state) with them a new contract.

Finally, when you say that the west took a stand against slavery, let me ask, do you somehow subcutaneously take a small pleasure out of this fact because you feel yourself as a member of this culture? And if you do, does it strike you, that you subconsciously put your self in a group (western culture) that did something right without you being there with the same ease you exclude yourself from a subgroup (northern americans) that did something wrong? Just a question.

[kxenos]

Deep down, your suspension is incorrect and reflect your way of thinking. Finish your wine and go to sleep as I will.

[tszaboo]

What I never understood, there is equality, right? Every color is equal.

Legally there is equality, yes. That's about it. But when you look around there, you see every kind of job, or region has a fixed color. (Except for the little initiatives to create equality in practice.)

Today standard is: You need a certain education to get a certain job. Unless the person had that education, I dont expect them to have a certain job. Now, when I went to university, there was a total number of 0 from the african european, the muslim and 1 from the country's largest minority. There were several from the far east. Learning EE or CS. There is no basketball education, or nitiatives to create equality. Why would there be?
Next time we will see that work is racist, because you need a degree for something, rigth?

[Jeff_Birt]

I think many of you have allowed yourselves to fall into a trap. A very common tactic of those seeking power and/or your money is to create a problem and get everyone whipped up into a furor over said made up problem. Of course the same people who fabricated the problem also have a solution to sell you. Stating that 'western' science is racist is the fabricated problem, arguing over the sins of our fathers is a distraction.

Science is about understanding the world about us, it is universal. The color of your skin, your nationality or your religion are irrelevant. Our modern understanding of science draws from sources all over the world throughout all of human history. And, given that all of humanity's ancestors immigrated out of Africa pre-historic times you could say that all of science if African in origin (yes I'm being silly there).

Don't get distracted with the racism and slavery furor, it is a trap. All of us can trace our family tress and find ancestors who were oppressed and ancestors who were oppressors.

[Cerebus]

I think many of you have allowed yourselves to fall into a trap. A very common tactic of those seeking power and/or your money is to create a problem and get everyone whipped up into a furor over said made up problem. Of course the same people who fabricated the problem also have a solution to sell you. Stating that 'western' science is racist is the fabricated problem, arguing over the sins of our fathers is a distraction.

I'm sure that there is some truth in that but I suspect it only accounts for a fraction of the people involved in this. More likely motivations are the usual ones in politics - "something needs to be done", "I'd like to shag that man/woman who's speaking", simple tribalism (note that's a small 't'), herd mentality etc. etc.

Like all political lies there is a grain of truth at the core of this. Remember that this started at protests aimed at removing a statue of Cecil Rhodes. I can quite understand why people would want to remove a statue that honours someone that is now, with more than a little justification, regarded as an oppressor. You aren't going to find many statues in public places of Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, etc. etc.

It's a short, but familiar, step from "this is a statue of a bad man" to "the people who put this statue up are bad",  to "anybody like the people who put this statue up are bad", to "all our problems are caused by people who are like the people who put this statue up - kill them all". There's no rationality in that progress of events but it will catch up many, many people who ought to know better. Once you've abandoned rationality to take that first step it's easier to sidestep rationality when you're further down the path. Before you know it you've got a great big pile of bodies, half your infrastructure in flames and you've still got the problems you started out with which weren't anyway caused by a statue of a man.

What I think is notable is that not one of the 'movers' in the video that sparked this discussion would have been born in 1994. Why 1994? Because that's the year that the first universal (i.e. majority rule) elections in South Africa were held. So none of the loud voices being heard there are of people who actually suffered under apartheid. Also I strongly suspect that none of the loud voices being heard here belong to the children of the poor, i.e. those making the noise are already part of a relatively privileged minority.

The turning point, as always, is going from the reasonable, to the small lie to the big lie. I suspect somehow that the speaker has no disbelief in the laws of Gravity, as espoused by Newton or otherwise.

Note that I think there is no difference here between the people who are leading this saying "It's all the White's fault" and the people in other places (and also, but not necessarily, other times)  who say that is it all the fault of the immigrants/Jews/blacks/Moslems/intellectuals/commies/liberals/SJWs. As long as there is an easily identifiable group to blame you don't have to take responsibility for your own shortfalls or inability to actually get on and do something about the substantive problems. If the 'other' isn't sufficiently identifiable you can make them wear yellow stars or pink triangles. If they don't actually exist, that's OK, just make them up - (Communists in the State Department). The followers, as opposed to the leaders, are the same as they've always been - bamboozled.

Why is this all worrying? One word: Zimbabwe.

[Cerebus]

Note that I think there is no difference here between the people who are leading this saying "It's all the White's fault" and the people in other places (and also, but not necessarily, other times)  who say that is it all the fault of the immigrants/Jews/blacks/Moslems/intellectuals/commies/liberals/SJWs. As long as there is an easily identifiable group to blame you don't have to take responsibility for your own shortfalls or inability to actually get on and do something about the substantive problems.

At what point do these identifiable groups then have to "own their own shit"
You can point at 1950's America and say there was enough cultural white racism to deny common rights to blacks,
just as we can point to Islamic countries and peoples for aiding or passively supporting ISIS and the jihadist mentality, or #BLM for ignoring black on black violence.

I'm not quite sure what your point is? It would appear that you are saying that the groups that get picked as scapegoats are at least partly culpable. That is not the dynamic of what happens here. They can be every shade of culpable for their own failings (from blameless to steeped in sin as black as a lawyer's heart) and it is irrelevant, because they are being used as scapegoats.

[Cerebus]

I'm not quite sure what your point is? It would appear that you are saying that the groups that get picked as scapegoats are at least partly culpable. That is not the dynamic of what happens here. They can be every shade of culpable for their own failings (from blameless to steeped in sin as black as a lawyer's heart) and it is irrelevant, because they are being used as scapegoats.

Which group is using which as a scrape goat?
did people miss their flight because all white people are racist or that #BLM thought it would be useful to their  culturally blind agenda to close down an airport.
When is it legitimate to say my reaction to your action is legitimate.

I don't think you're quite following this. It's an attempt to do some reasoned thinking about why these people (specifically these South African students) are acting like this, not a attempt to provide you with a hook on which to hang on your, what appears rather confused, thoughts about who is to blame. To blame, apparently, for missing a flight, which I can't see has anything to do with a bunch of South African students making outrageous claims about 'white' science for apparently political reasons. Your train of thought is a little, how can I put it, divergent, or as someone once described it to me "knight's move thinking" - it shoots off at right angles.

[XynxNet]

I wonder why this students sits in an environment created entirely by science, if she wants to abolish it so bad.
It's not as if you couldn't live more or less native if you really wanted to. There are still some people doing that on our planet.

[Rick Law]

About 1.5 minutes into the video, the lady in white lectured another student citing the rules of their "Progressive Space".  I take it to be their version of "safe space".  I think safe space is rather unsafe for the future of education.  Universities are too busy doing irrelevant things to create this "feel good" environment.  In do so, they failed their real job - which is to create knowledge and to create thinking minds.  Unfortunately, brain-dead academia is not just at UCT, it is world wide. 

Quote from National Post (Canada):
Brock University students attending this year’s campus Halloween party are being encouraged to check a website to make sure their costumes are not “prohibited.”

According to a “costume protocol” developed by the student union at the St. Catharines, Ont., university, traditional or religious headdresses, such as feathered bonnets and turbans, are off-limits. So, too, are thobes — ankle-length robes worn by Arab men; makeup depicting Japanese geishas; outfits containing the Confederate flag; and costumes that depict Caitlyn Jenner, the transgender celebrity.

Full article: http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/universities-crack-down-on-offensive-halloween-costumes-at-campus-parties

On the bright side, there is at least a little push back starting.  U of Chicago's Dean send incoming freshman (this year) a letter on U of Chicago's position on safe space and so called "trigger warnings":

"Our commitment to academic freedom means that we do not support so-called 'trigger warnings,' we do not cancel invited speakers because their topics might prove controversial, and we do not condone the creation of intellectual 'safe spaces' where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own, ..."

full artcile: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-university-of-chicago-safe-spaces-letter-met-20160825-story.html

Now it would be interesting to see what Tsinghua University's position, or Peking (Beijing) University's position, or India Institute of Technology's position on "safe space".  They are in a country that is making real progress rather than just being "progressive".  China had not be colonized by the west but certainly had been "man handled" by the west late 1800 to WWII era.  India was a British Colony.  Both India and China are making real progress.  I don't know for sure where they stand, but it would surprise me if you found "safe space" or "progressive space" in any of these three institutions.

[retrolefty]

What I never understood, there is equality, right? Every color is equal.

Legally there is equality, yes. That's about it. But when you look around there, you see every kind of job, or region has a fixed color. (Except for the little initiatives to create equality in practice.)

when you go beyond legal equality you quickly move towards a "equality of outcome" vs.  "equality of opportunity"

 That IMHO is the most insightful comment in this whole thread. Equal outcomes among people cannot be designed or implemented by individuals nor governments. Once legal equality is obtained the rest is up to individuals to succeed or fail on their own over time and over multi generations in some cases. The bus to utopia has yet to leave it's station.

[Cerebus]

I don't think you're quite following this. It's an attempt to do some reasoned thinking about why these people (specifically these South African students) are acting like this, not a attempt to provide you with a hook on which to hang on your, what appears rather confused, thoughts about who is to blame. To blame, apparently, for missing a flight, which I can't see has anything to do with a bunch of South African students making outrageous claims about 'white' science for apparently political reasons. Your train of thought is a little, how can I put it, divergent, or as someone once described it to me "knight's move thinking" - it shoots off at right angles.

Well there's clarifying a debate point and there's being a pompous dick about it,
thanks for clearing that up for me.

Look, you're just not making any sense. Insulting me doesn't help clarify what you're saying or move the argument forward.

Frankly, I don't know where you're coming from or where you're trying to go. At the moment my suspicions are either that you're drunk, or that you're trying to bend the argument to some vaguely anti-somebody agenda, probably racially related, or that you've got mental health issues. If it's the either of the former then you don't really want a debate, if it's the latter then we probably don't have a clue how to help you.

[Cerebus]

U of Chicago's Dean send incoming freshman (this year) a letter on U of Chicago's position on safe space and so called "trigger warnings":

"Our commitment to academic freedom means that we do not support so-called 'trigger warnings,' we do not cancel invited speakers because their topics might prove controversial, and we do not condone the creation of intellectual 'safe spaces' where individuals can retreat from ideas and perspectives at odds with their own, ..."

When I originally encountered the idea of "safe space" in academic argument the idea was one of an environment where one could express any idea without fear of censure for exploring unpopular or "unthinkable" ideas. That is the exact opposite of what the idea seems to have evolved into which would appear to be some form or pre-censure of unpopular or "unthinkable" ideas. Academia ought to present you with ideas that you fear, dislike or are opposed to in an environment that fosters civil, polite discussion of those ideas. I find this being turned on its head perverse.

[doobedoobedo]

That is the exact opposite of what the idea seems to have evolved into which would appear to be some form or pre-censure of unpopular or "unthinkable" ideas.

I think what you meant to say was that you got a different set of bigots taking advantage to the ones you were expecting.

[Cerebus]

That is the exact opposite of what the idea seems to have evolved into which would appear to be some form or pre-censure of unpopular or "unthinkable" ideas.

I think what you meant to say was that you got a different set of bigots taking advantage to the ones you were expecting.

No, it goes beyond that. It appears that the modern "safe space" is a complete inversion of the old, not merely a change of who gets to speak there.

The old was a "safe space" to say anything, the new is a "safe space" to not hear anything you don't like. The inherent risk of the old "safe space" is that bigots would take advantage of it but the promise was that something useful might get heard that would otherwise not be said. The modern just seems to be a way of getting an echo chamber that only repeats what you want to hear which, if everybody's sensibilities are taken into account, can logically only result in silence.

The old was about ensuring the airing of ideas - which has some obvious utility. The new seems to be about actively avoiding new ideas which seems futile.

[Marco]

The new seems to be about actively avoiding new ideas which seems futile.

No, it's about avoiding non social justice ideas. Most all ideas are old after all.

Although I must grant the social justice types that they are quite apt at coming up with new ideas, it's far easier when they don't have to make sense.

[EEVblog]

Passed it up to a mod, not willing to engage with someone like you

Seriously people 
You don't report things because it's something you don't like and you want it removed so you aren't tempted to reply.
Just don't reply!

As for this thread, either keep it civil and on topic or it gets locked.

[Tinkerer]

I think this all boils down to a lack of understanding of exactly what science is and a failure of schooling.

At its basis, science is come up with an idea, test said idea out, and if idea proves to be false or not entirely correct, revise or come up with new idea and repeat. You arnt going to find anyone to argue against this logic but perhaps they might try arguing against the word science itself. Yea, that still doesnt make any sense, but I think if we have a catastrophe of some sort these sorts of people probably wont last too long.

[EEVblog]

When I originally encountered the idea of "safe space" in academic argument the idea was one of an environment where one could express any idea without fear of censure for exploring unpopular or "unthinkable" ideas. That is the exact opposite of what the idea seems to have evolved into which would appear to be some form or pre-censure of unpopular or "unthinkable" ideas. Academia ought to present you with ideas that you fear, dislike or are opposed to in an environment that fosters civil, polite discussion of those ideas. I find this being turned on its head perverse.

Safe spaces are the most ridiculous social concept in a long time.
They are so stupid and counterproductive to the advancement of society and education I just can't see the concept surviving, it is destined to enter a death spiral and implode under it's own weight of stupidity.
But maybe its the idea we had to have in order to inoculate us against it in the future.

[Macbeth]

Passed it up to a mod, not willing to engage with someone like you

Seriously people 
You don't report things because it's something you don't like and you want it removed so you aren't tempted to reply.
Just don't reply!

As for this thread, either keep it civil and on topic or it gets locked.

Ahem, if I may so bold as to suggest that you create a "Safe Space" forum. Let anyone and everyone post in it. Just don't tell them that as soon as their post count in there goes above 2 their access to other forums mysteriously drops. No new posts to read. A kind of "reverse shadow ban" if you will  Leave them to their own devices. This may seem cruel but really it is what they ask for, a kind of circlejerk echo chamber. 

[EEVblog]

I think this all boils down to a lack of understanding of exactly what science is and a failure of schooling.

It is. That woman should not have "respected" and apologised to, she should have been laughed out of the room.
But I suspect the whole event was setup in order to give her a platform 
Sam harris nails it:
https://youtu.be/pmPtH4IDFNQ?t=2m29s

[MK14]

but I think if we have a catastrophe of some sort these sorts of people probably wont last too long.

Don't underestimate the huge protective powers of the Black Magic Voodoo, Witch Doctors. After you have given them a few hundred dollars.


An arguably rogue Doctor, once published an article/paper, stating that some vaccines cause young children to become autistic. It is widely/unanimously believed to be false/nonsense paper(s), with no scientific basis.

But sadly, as a result, some mothers refuse for their young children to get vaccinated. Sometimes with dreadful/bad outcomes.

Some non-Scientific information, can actually be dangerous to people, such as the (very likely to be false) claims about the dangers of the vaccine.

So it is a worry, when some people are significantly unscientific.

E.g. In the US, an apparently dangerous person, going round with a gun. Refusing to listen to Police, to put the gun down. Gets shot dead, and sometimes a YouTube video, shows what happened. But the video can be missing important early stages of what happened and be a bit blurry/shaky. Some people jump to incorrect conclusions, and ...

Then more people are killed, during the rioting that occurs the next day. Even though the police had to defend themselves against an armed gunman, who refused to put the gun down.

[bitslice]

Just don't reply!

wtf,
you warned me not to kick off if someone was being a cunt, so I haven't.

Noted that sarky patronising comments about "divergent thinking", accusations of drunkness, racism and mental health issues are now OK.

Look at my initial posts, I did not deserve this response, and presumably I'll now get the shitty end of the stick.

Although I must grant the social justice types that they are quite apt at coming up with new ideas, it's far easier when they don't have to make sense.

To be fair, some ideas of equality are always going to be resisted, because the status quo suits the majority and for the most part we are oblivious to its implications for minorities.

[dannyf]

Now it would be interesting to see what Tsinghua University's position, or Peking (Beijing) University's position,

Both schools have a far more diverse student body than any of the elite schools in the US that offer race-based AA.

[Cerebus]

The new seems to be about actively avoiding new ideas which seems futile.

No, it's about avoiding non social justice ideas. Most all ideas are old after all.

But we're talking about universities and the like. The ideas might very well be old but they may be new to the people hearing them. Up until I went to university the diversity of thinking I encountered was relatively narrow by comparison with what I found there. It was important to me to encounter those and as a consequence I changed my thinking on many things and reinforced my thinking on others. More importantly it had now become my "thinking" on various subjects, not my "beliefs" about them. Some of the things I changed my opinions on are things that some of my "elders and betters" said I ought not to even listen to - they were wrong. The idea that you can be corrupted just by hearing something smacks of medieval religion yet seems to be the tenor of the version of "safe spaces" we're hearing about here, that is wrong too.

Although I must grant the social justice types that they are quite apt at coming up with new ideas, it's far easier when they don't have to make sense.

I would imagine they make more sense than the ideas that would come from someone who identified as "anti-social in-justice". 

[Cerebus]

An arguably rogue Doctor, once published an article/paper, stating that some vaccines cause young children to become autistic. It is widely/unanimously believed to be false/nonsense paper(s), with no scientific basis.

But sadly, as a result, some mothers refuse for their young children to get vaccinated. Sometimes with dreadful/bad outcomes.

The problem there was that the politicians came out and said that vaccination was perfectly safe. Immediately nobody believed them and started distrusting vaccination. Why, oh why, would the politicians pick this one occasion to come out and actually tell the truth. 

But seriously. In the UK, trust of 'official sources' had become so eroded at the time that 'official pronouncements' on the vaccination issue were almost guaranteed to do more harm than good. We remember John Selwyn Gummer* feeding his little daughter hamburgers in front of the press at the time of the BSE crisis and we'd just had "weapons of mass destruction ready for use in 45 minutes" comprehensively debunked so anything that looked like a government cover-up was going to gain traction. After all, the government was behind the vaccination programme...

So the problem wasn't that one idiot put out fatally flawed theories about vaccination and autism, it was that 'authority' had so debased itself that it was powerless to counter his claims. Ironically it came down to "Who do you believe, a scientist or the government?". We now have a situation where children are again dying from measles because there's a multi-year immunity hole in the population.

*When he was Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.

[bitslice]

Safe spaces are the most ridiculous social concept in a long time.
They are so stupid and counterproductive to the advancement of society and education I just can't see the concept surviving, it is destined to enter a death spiral and implode under it's own weight of stupidity.
But maybe its the idea we had to have in order to inoculate us against it in the future.

Students creating "safe spaces" are possibly doing this as a political extension of the ill-defined laws against hate speech, which oddly the rest of society has signed up to.

It's a way of controlling the language used, and if you can do that then you can deem certain political and social ideas as not acceptable - usually to best suit your own politics.

So while it's stupid from an educational point of view, from a Leftist standpoint it's a fantastic method of speech censorship. You just need a constant cycle of people you can declare as victims of oppression, align yourself with that group, and then create a group think on any policy you like.

It's probably naive to expect students to simply learn about the world, instead of actually trying to find unique strategies to control and manipulate it.

[EEVblog]

Just don't reply!

wtf,
you warned me not to kick off if someone was being a cunt, so I haven't.
Noted that sarky patronising comments about "divergent thinking", accusations of drunkness, racism and mental health issues are now OK.
Look at my initial posts, I did not deserve this response, and presumably I'll now get the shitty end of the stick.

NOTE:

This is NOT a post-by-post moderated forum. No moderator has read this entire thread to see what's going on.
It is not our place to protect you against thing you don't want to hear, this is not a safe space.
Everyone goes by the rules or they are banned.
Both you and dannyf have "Watched" next to your name for reason, it's because you have previously said or some something that almost got you banned, you have a zero chances left.
If you see a post that is against the forum rules then report it.
But the report I just got asking to delete a comment so that the reporter wouldn't be "forced" to reply is as ridiculous a reason as I have ever seen.

I am at the end of my tolerance with this thread, everyone zip it on the personal attacks or I lock the thread and or start banning people.

[MK14]

An arguably rogue Doctor, once published an article/paper, stating that some vaccines cause young children to become autistic. It is widely/unanimously believed to be false/nonsense paper(s), with no scientific basis.

But sadly, as a result, some mothers refuse for their young children to get vaccinated. Sometimes with dreadful/bad outcomes.

The problem there was that the politicians came out and said that vaccination was perfectly safe. Immediately nobody believed them and started distrusting vaccination. Why, oh why, would the politicians pick this one occasion to come out and actually tell the truth. 

But seriously. In the UK, trust of 'official sources' had become so eroded at the time that 'official pronouncements' on the vaccination issue were almost guaranteed to do more harm than good. We remember John Selwyn Gummer* feeding his little daughter hamburgers in front of the press at the time of the BSE crisis and we'd just had "weapons of mass destruction ready for use in 45 minutes" comprehensively debunked so anything that looked like a government cover-up was going to gain traction. After all, the government was behind the vaccination programme...

So the problem wasn't that one idiot put out fatally flawed theories about vaccination and autism, it was that 'authority' had so debased itself that it was powerless to counter his claims. Ironically it came down to "Who do you believe, a scientist or the government?". We now have a situation where children are again dying from measles because there's a multi-year immunity hole in the population.

*When he was Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.

Good point. I'd forgotten about that stuff. But now you mention it, it has brought all the memories back.

There is also the problem, that Governments have sometimes been accused of having the wrong views about some stuff. Then going round, asking different scientists, who will, for lots of (poor tax payers money), create a report, backing up the (probably mistaken) theories of government.
I.e. Like the classic saying (something on the lines of) "There are Lies, Really bad lies and then there are statistics ..."

If I remember correctly. During the first half of the (what you just brought up), "BSE crisis". Most/many people were avoiding Beef like the plague. Yet many sources were saying, there is no such thing as "BSE", DON'T WORRY!
I remember totally avoiding Beef and related products, like Beef stock cubes etc.

I have to admit, if when Scientists/Doctors, said something like "Don't worry, these types of proper steak Beef stuff are completely safe". I would still avoid them (as many other people did), if I remember correctly.

I guess once you have been told various Beef stuff are very dangerous, but some Beef stuff is safe, and seeing news programmes where someone had the BSE related illness, and the horrific symptoms, of basically being almost brain dead, while still alive. As I think it turns your brain into mush, or something.
I'm glad that illness has mostly/fully disappeared.

Yes, faith in Governments, is relatively low. Some sources say that is why, radically different governments, such as Donald Trump are getting rather successful. They say people want change.

Hence Brexit, as part of the same thing, I guess. But Brexit is highly complicated, so I could easily be wrong. I.e. there are roughly 25..30 million (people) sets of reasons, why Brexit was voted for.

If that girl/student in the OP's video, was just stating it as a discussion point. I don't think it would be too bad. The worrying aspect, was that she seemed to really and big time, believe in her, stuff. Even though a moderate knowledge of Science, would probably change a persons mind, about what she said.

[EEVblog]

Students creating "safe spaces" are possibly doing this as a political extension of the ill-defined laws against hate speech, which oddly the rest of society has signed up to.

They are also sadly being taught this stuff in gender studies or some other humanities course.

[EEVblog]

If that girl/student in the OP's video, was just stating it as a discussion point. I don't think it would be too bad. The worrying aspect, was that she seemed to really and big time, believe in her, stuff. Even though a moderate knowledge of Science, would probably change a persons mind, about what she said.

It should be primary school level science and reason. That's why she should have been laughed out of the room by absolutely everyone, but there was what, one person willing to call her on it? and that person apologised 
The future is grim.

[bitslice]

This is NOT a post-by-post moderated forum. No moderator has read this entire thread to see what's going on.
It is not our place to protect you against thing you don't want to hear, this is not a safe space.
Everyone goes by the rules or they are banned.
Both you and dannyf have "Watched" next to your name for reason, it's because you have previously said or some something that almost got you banned, you have a zero chances left.
If you see a post that is against the forum rules then report it.
But the report I just got asking to delete a comment so that the reporter wouldn't be "forced" to reply is as ridiculous a reason as I have ever seen.

I am at the end of my tolerance with this thread, everyone zip it on the personal attacks or I lock the thread and or start banning people.

I don't remember using the word "forced".

The intention was to get the personal abuse off the thread, not a request for a "safe space" or to protect my special snowflake feelings.

Rules.
2) No personal attacks.

I'm quite happy to remove my comments if those from Cerebus are removed too, this was the sole intention of my report - that someone with access can get rid of the name calling so we can both move on.
I don't appreciate this being interpreted as a request for special favours from you.

I don't appreciate myself and DannyF being publicly discussed in this way, particularly as if I hadn't been abused by some snotty kid who was freely allowed to shit over other people simply for being "new", then I wouldn't have attracted any attention.

Nobody is attacking anyone?

I saw a post, I reported it, it is against the rules - yet I'm still the one being publicly shit on.

I thought that by passing this back to a mod it could be dealt with privately, not repeatedly dragged through a thread in which we are all clearly carrying on with quite peaceably.

[Macbeth]

An arguably rogue Doctor, once published an article/paper, stating that some vaccines cause young children to become autistic. It is widely/unanimously believed to be false/nonsense paper(s), with no scientific basis.

But sadly, as a result, some mothers refuse for their young children to get vaccinated. Sometimes with dreadful/bad outcomes.

The problem there was that the politicians came out and said that vaccination was perfectly safe. Immediately nobody believed them and started distrusting vaccination. Why, oh why, would the politicians pick this one occasion to come out and actually tell the truth. 

But seriously. In the UK, trust of 'official sources' had become so eroded at the time that 'official pronouncements' on the vaccination issue were almost guaranteed to do more harm than good. We remember John Selwyn Gummer* feeding his little daughter hamburgers in front of the press at the time of the BSE crisis and we'd just had "weapons of mass destruction ready for use in 45 minutes" comprehensively debunked so anything that looked like a government cover-up was going to gain traction. After all, the government was behind the vaccination programme...

So the problem wasn't that one idiot put out fatally flawed theories about vaccination and autism, it was that 'authority' had so debased itself that it was powerless to counter his claims. Ironically it came down to "Who do you believe, a scientist or the government?". We now have a situation where children are again dying from measles because there's a multi-year immunity hole in the population.

*When he was Minister of Agriculture, Fisheries and Food.

What does the ancient short lived BSE nonsense have to do with the crazy worldwide real child killing insanity to do with childhood vaccines?

Why is it that, unlike John Gummer, the batshit insane witch married to the Blair also wouldn't allow her kids be protected by the 3-in-1 vaccines her government was "forcing" on the proles?

Let's not forget she was also a friend of that Australian charlatan and pyramid marketing scammer Peter Foster?

[MK14]

If that girl/student in the OP's video, was just stating it as a discussion point. I don't think it would be too bad. The worrying aspect, was that she seemed to really and big time, believe in her, stuff. Even though a moderate knowledge of Science, would probably change a persons mind, about what she said.

It should be primary school level science and reason. That's why she should have been laughed out of the room by absolutely everyone, but there was what, one person willing to call her on it? and that person apologised 
The future is grim.

The basic concept of creating the "safe spaces". So that people can release their true opinions/thinking about things, WITHOUT having to worry too much about their peers and being laughed at, or interrupted. Is potentially useful as a brainstorming exercise and to find out what people really think.

But her ideas, are very worrying. I wonder if her Science lessons, were lacking in some respects. As she does not seem to understand the important founding values/principles of Science. I can't tell if the problem lies with poor teaching, or if she as a pupil did not pay enough attention or something.

Some people are (accidentally) killed, because they don't understand basic Science.

E.g. Someone in bare feet, standing on their garden lawn, cutting the (still on) mains extension cord, with metal scissors. Instantly electrocuting/killing themselves. (This was a news story in the UK, a very long time ago, before common RCD usage).

Or filling their car with petrol, accidentally spilling petrol all over themselves. Then lighting a cigarette, with disastrous consequences. I still can't easily understand how someone could do such a foolish thing. I guess the lighting the cigarette was such a constant habit, they did not even realize (consciously), they were doing it. Maybe that had something to do with it.

[MK14]

Yes, faith in Governments, is relatively low. Some sources say that is why, radically different governments, such as Donald Trump are getting rather successful. They say people want change.

America is in a difficult position,
the media bias there is (seemingly) quite pronounced, with a quite blatant spin on a number of issues,
if you can't trust any public sources then government is going to be even less trusted. Particularly if it has morphed from a service to the people, into requiring generations of people to be dependant on it to justify its existence.

There's more public appetite for unsupported dirt on Presidential candidates than any interest in policies, it's like an acceptance of the idea that nothing changes anyway

It's a bit annoying that in the UK, the BBC is having a free for all on Trump, because by smearing him they can implicitly tarnish all vaguely right wing thinking. And Hillary is a woman, so, untouchable.

That is another danger, of the girl/student in the OP's video. Such lack of real scientific knowledge. Can allow dishonest claims/things that governments and potential presidential candidates, to be believed by enough gullible voters, to get unsuitable candidates elected.

One even has to worry, by some of Trumps statements, if he has a good enough grasp on reality, and what is practical/good.

I don't want to attack the character of the girl/student in the video. But if someone with those sort of views and understanding (or rather lack of it) of science. Were to be elected as leader of a country. It could end up going horribly wrong.

If too many voters are affected by this phenomenon (lack of at least a basic understanding of science, maths and other stuff). A really unsuitable government could be voted in.

It could start wars, in some cases. Arguably, the second world war was started, because one individual had somewhat crazy and far fetched, racially motivated views. Which they decided to do something about the incorrectly perceived problem, the rest is history. (There are many other factors as well, including the depression).

[Cerebus]

If that girl/student in the OP's video, was just stating it as a discussion point. I don't think it would be too bad. The worrying aspect, was that she seemed to really and big time, believe in her, stuff. Even though a moderate knowledge of Science, would probably change a persons mind, about what she said.

It should be primary school level science and reason. That's why she should have been laughed out of the room by absolutely everyone, but there was what, one person willing to call her on it? and that person apologised 
The future is grim.

The reaction ought not to be laughter - I think that probably falls under the unnecessary roughness rules - but open mouthed looks of "Did she really just say that?". I know that I, if faced with a room full of people giving me that look, would be rapidly peddling towards "What I meant was..." and looking red-faced and sheepish. The fact that they aren't, but are making noises instead suggests that this isn't the first time they've heard something like this from her in this session.

Actually, the feel of the whole thing isn't too far from some debates I was in at university, with some social scientist treating proper science as if it could be approached from the relativistic perspectives used in the social sciences. Except our social scientists were a bit tougher and could take the catcalls and cries of derision from the corner that I would have been sitting in.

I think the apology was meant to be for an infraction of house rules - it's difficult to tell from the poor audio quality, but I think it was a cry of "bullshit!" or similar and he was getting a telling off for a point of order not for disagreement per se and was being asked to apologise for speaking out of turn. That's normal debating etiquette - it just sounds off because the lass in the chair puts it in terms - if I heard correctly - of "Disrespecting the sacred space". The latter - again if I heard correctly - moves this from a potentially civilised debate, no matter how left-field the ideas being expressed, into wo-wo land*. But then the speakers unique perspective of "decolonizing** knowledge" takes it firmly off into la-la land.

*I have no difficulty with the idea of a sacred space, or of respecting one - I take my hat off if I walk into a church - but I find it a bit of an impedance mis-match with a debate/political discussion.

**I was guessing as to how to spell "decolonizing" and fully expected my spelling checker to stick a wavy line under it. It didn't. Apparently this word has been used often enough that it's in someone's (presumably reasonably mainstream) dictionary. That I didn't expect.

[Marco]

The idea that you can be corrupted just by hearing something smacks of medieval religion yet seems to be the tenor of the version of "safe spaces" we're hearing about here, that is wrong too.

No, in fact safe spaces proves that idea. These kids didn't catch some disease, they are what they are because of the ideas surrounding them. From the media, education, peer pressure and upbringing.

Shielding themselves from a debate they can't just shut down by continuing to shout racist is a defense mechanism. Extremely insane ideas need extremely insane efforts to reinforce. I wouldn't be surprised to see Social Justice turn into communism v2.0, with just as much bloodshed as last time.

[Cerebus]

Extremely insane ideas need extremely insane efforts to reinforce.

Sadly, history shows that extremely insane ideas can perpetuate with only casual reinforcement.

A trivial example - we still have millions of people who insist that the world was created in 7 literal days and is only a few thousand years old. They are exposed to the ideas of modern science and evolution, along with reasoned arguments for the same, regularly and yet still cling to creationism with little more reinforcement than the occasional sermon on the subject. If you think about it, it's no crazier than African shamen calling down lightning as "fact" or an "African understanding" of gravity. But exposure to the 'idea' of evolution hasn't instantly 'corrupted' these creationists - in fact they remain remarkably robust in their beliefs despite not having a "safe space" to protect them from the corrupting influence of evolutionist ideas.

I'm still taken aback by the way that anybody in academia has somehow thought it was a good idea to go along with this idea of "safe spaces".

[MK14]

It could start wars, in some cases. Arguably, the second world war was started, because one individual had somewhat crazy and far fetched, racially motivated views. Which they decided to do something about the incorrectly perceived problem, the rest is history. (There are many other factors as well, including the depression).

I think the social issue of the time was ongoing attempts at revolution within Germany and the WWI defeat being blamed on the same group. That the communists were mostly led by Jews simply meant that they could more readily be attacked as a symbol of anti-national interests.

More recently I find it worrying how antagonistic the US government is towards the Russians, and we could do without Hillary's posturing on the issue. I don't want to die because Turkey shoots down another Russian plane and she decides to back them up.

Various people, seem to think that BOTH possible new US presidents, could end up starting wars. Some are especially worried by Hillary Clinton, and others by Trump.

Russia/Putin have been getting increasingly hostile to the West, in the last few years or so. It probably showed signs of being really bad, on the day they invaded/stole Crimea.

These are NOT the best of times, to find out that our education systems, may be too under performing. Science, Engineering, Medicine and many other subject areas, would become increasingly important, if major wars were to break out.

Hopefully, I think the current news reports, about possible war with Russia, may actually really be (in my guess/opinion), PROPAGANDA. Probably originating from Russia, as I get the impression that Putin, wants to help get Trump into office. I.e. Things are NOT really that bad. But who knows ?

I think we (the West), are way, way too reliant on China, for so much stuff. If war was to break out, or even if relationships were to turn very sour. The West would (especially in the short and medium term), suffer really, really badly.
Both economically and because we get so much stuff from China (usually manufactured goods), we would be hard put, to quickly replace China as a major supplier.

At best, the massive ships taking stuff to and from China to the rest of the world, could be very badly disrupted in a war, situation.
But if China gets involved with a war, and takes sides. They may even refuse to supply some/all countries with the goods they want.
It does not seem like a safe/reliable way of doing things, to me.

The education systems (e.g. in South Africa, as shown in the video), should never have been allowed to get so out of hand. Assuming I am NOT jumping to conclusions, based on too little information/evidence.

[EEVblog]

I don't remember using the word "forced".

You implied it and you know it. There was no other way for me to interpret your report other than go and clean the thread up so that you didn't have the respond.

I'm quite happy to remove my comments if those from Cerebus are removed too

You are free to remove your own posts at any time.

, this was the sole intention of my report - that someone with access can get rid of the name calling so we can both move on.

You can and could have moved on any time you like. You did not have to post a single reply to anyone.

I don't appreciate myself and DannyF being publicly discussed in this way, particularly as if I hadn't been abused by some snotty kid who was freely allowed to shit over other people simply for being "new", then I wouldn't have attracted any attention.

My apologies, I thought everyone could see that "Watched" symbol next to your profile, seems only mods can see it.

I saw a post, I reported it, it is against the rules - yet I'm still the one being publicly shit on.

The post you reported was nothing, no personal attack in it at all, the only antagonising part was actually your own reply!
Moderators are not going to go back and read an 8 page thread just so they can get the context of some argument.
If you saw a post that was a personal attack then:
a) You should have reported it then an there.
and
b) Not have responded

[EEVblog]

I'm still taken aback by the way that anybody in academia has somehow thought it was a good idea to go along with this idea of "safe spaces".

It likely started out as the thin edge of an unseeable wedge.

[EEVblog]

MK14 & Bitslice, your last posts are a classic example of how this threat will get derailed again. Please keep it strictly on topic.
I don't like to reign in threads like this, but there are certain topic that are guaranteed to derail a thread and get it locked.

[MK14]

MK14 & Bitslice, your last posts are a classic example of how this threat will get derailed again. Please keep it strictly on topic.
I don't like to reign in threads like this, but there are certain topic that are guaranteed to derail a thread and get it locked.

Sorry! Back on topic.

It is perfectly possible that the video (OP), is a sign of the times. Maybe twenty or thirty years ago, a similar conversation/meeting could have occurred in South Africa. But the rest of the world would know nothing about it, as mobile phones, cheap video recordings and even youtube itself, either did not exist at that time, or were unavailable to most people.

At the end of the day, we are seeing just the opinion(s) of one student, in South Africa. It is perfectly possible, that a huge number of them, hold much more sensible views, and the person who is portrayed in the video, is going to end up being a University dropout (fail their later exams), and/or get a poor graded degree.

In some respects I/we are being a bit naughty in this thread, because we are basing our comments, especially on one youtube video, which itself is based on one person.
It could even be that person was having a bad day, and they don't usually express such unscientific opinions.

[Rick Law]

If that girl/student in the OP's video, was just stating it as a discussion point. I don't think it would be too bad. The worrying aspect, was that she seemed to really and big time, believe in her, stuff. Even though a moderate knowledge of Science, would probably change a persons mind, about what she said.

It should be primary school level science and reason. That's why she should have been laughed out of the room by absolutely everyone, but there was what, one person willing to call her on it? and that person apologised 
The future is grim.

The reaction ought not to be laughter - I think that probably falls under the unnecessary roughness rules - but open mouthed looks of "Did she really just say that?". I know that I, if faced with a room full of people giving me that look, would be rapidly peddling towards "What I meant was..." and looking red-faced and sheepish. The fact that they aren't, but are making noises instead suggests that this isn't the first time they've heard something like this from her in this session.

Actually, the feel of the whole thing isn't too far from some debates I was in at university,
...

The audio is bad.  I thought I heard laughter  (like a big Ha Ha but brief) and then the lady in white called out this gentleman and did the tongue lashing...

Too bad the context of the whole thing is not known.  At a truly public forum, if laugh at her is inappropriate for the setting, I would have walked out.  But - it is not out of the question that the audiences were not at liberty to leave.  They might have been "assigned" or could have been a requirement to attend.  The gentleman's submissive response leads me to think he was not there by choice.

As to "safe space", I think it went something like this:

1. Brilliant idea from politician: Since those with college degree makes more money, so every one should have college degree
2. Brilliant observation by univ admin: Hmm, not everyone can add, subtract, or follow a sentence with more than two words...

3. It is well established that many univ's sport department have a number of mickey mouse course - they help (whatever)ball players with IQ less than the ball.  They can get players who can't count to 10 to graduate and get the degree.  So let's see if we can expand those ideas school-wide!
4.  An important announcement from univ admin: We are rolling out new courses befitting our new diverse student body - art of drinking water, how to eat pizza while texting, ...

5. Bureaucrats being Bureaucrats : Whole department was form - "Department of Worthless Studies"
6. Bureaucrats being Bureaucrats : Hmm... not every one has money to burn?  That's OK, the government steps in to help.

7. Another brilliant idea from univ adim: Wow, free money...  now we can recruit MORE students with IQ less than their shoe-size.  We will have a great cafeteria, gym,  (no kidding, a college put their gourmet cafeteria on their flyer to attract student) - like a cancer, it just grows!

8. Life is not a box of Chocolate: Now only 1/3 of college grads graduates and get a professional job.  The rest go back to their high school job at the convenient store, but with a huge student debt over their head - while they work "hard" to achieve their life's goal - to have the next latest and greatest iPhone/Andriod.
9. I may not be get along with my parents, but I am close to them.  I have been living off them... I mean living with them... all these years.  They depend on me to keep the basement warm, the fridge empty... I mean clean.., and the bank account light...  I mean I help them balance their check book.

So, if these kids has no prospect for learning, but the univ wants to keep the stream of revenue...  Let's just give them some room where they don't have to realize they and education don't mix.

[Marco]

A trivial example - we still have millions of people who insist that the world was created in 7 literal days and is only a few thousand years old.

I don't see how that's a counter, they desperately try to shield their kids at school (home schooling, creation science etc). I'm sure they try to shield their kids from non evangelical media as well.

They are exposed to the ideas of modern science and evolution

Only the ones forced to fight to protect their kids, the rest can live in their insular community's safe space. They have their church communities, they have their own media, they want their own education (to the extent they don't homeschool).

[bitslice]

You implied it and you know it. There was no other way for me to interpret your report other than go and clean the thread up so that you didn't have the respond.

No, that's just how you are choosing to read it and you put "forced" in quotes as if you were quoting me, I'd get banned if I responded so I'm not about to threaten anyone.
You hold a knife to my throat and expect me to do otherwise?

You are free to remove your own posts at any time.

Done, otherwise this will drag on all night, Cerebus can do what he likes

You can and could have moved on any time you like. You did not have to post a single reply to anyone.

What's the point in having a rule 2 if it gets ignored by posters and mods alike?
This has been a complete waste of time.

The post you reported was nothing, no personal attack in it at all,

I reported the start of the issue and suggested that all of our subsequent posts be deleted, the alternative is reporting everything and spewing out a pile of reports your end.
I assumed the former approach was the logical one.

a) You should have reported it then an there.
and
b) Not have responded

I tried to do both, naively thinking that this was your preferred way of dealing with it, yet here I am having to repeatedly discuss this publicly with you and I'm still left holding the shitty end of the stick.

It seems you'd rather make multiple posts publicly questioning me and repeatedly derail a thread, rather than just delete the post.

This is the second time I've fallen foul of this unique method of modding - ignore the abuser, shit on the other guy, and if at all possible, continue shitting on him. And if that's going well, single him out for more of the same at a later date.

[Cerebus]

At the end of the day, we are seeing just the opinion(s) of one student, in South Africa. It is perfectly possible, that a huge number of them, hold much more sensible views, and the person who is portrayed in the video, is going to end up being a University dropout (fail their later exams), and/or get a poor graded degree.

In some respects I/we are being a bit naughty in this thread, because we are basing our comments, especially on one youtube video, which itself is based on one person.
It could even be that person was having a bad day, and they don't usually express such unscientific opinions.

I have several friends who are ex-patriot South Africans who get back there every now and again. In some respects that makes them the best observers because they know the territory yet are away from it for long enough at a time to see the changes.

All of them express concern at the way they see politics going over there - trending towards more rather than less divisiveness. I suspect having Zimbabwe 'up the road', with a similar history and a very wrong turn of events in recent years is a disturbing precedent. All of them are old enough to have been brought up under minority rule and were there during the transition to majority rule and moved here after majority rule had a chance to 'bed in' and all thought that, by and large, things were going well back then. One of them, a native of Capetown, was considering moving back there as their SA family was getting older but after a trip to discuss it decided against as they felt that it was now simply unsafe there. This is, obviously, a précis of many conversations, over many years but I think it represents a fair summary.

[MK14]

At the end of the day, we are seeing just the opinion(s) of one student, in South Africa. It is perfectly possible, that a huge number of them, hold much more sensible views, and the person who is portrayed in the video, is going to end up being a University dropout (fail their later exams), and/or get a poor graded degree.

In some respects I/we are being a bit naughty in this thread, because we are basing our comments, especially on one youtube video, which itself is based on one person.
It could even be that person was having a bad day, and they don't usually express such unscientific opinions.

I have several friends who are ex-patriot South Africans who get back there every now and again. In some respects that makes them the best observers because they know the territory yet are away from it for long enough at a time to see the changes.

All of them express concern at the way they see politics going over there - trending towards more rather than less divisiveness. I suspect having Zimbabwe 'up the road', with a similar history and a very wrong turn of events in recent years is a disturbing precedent. All of them are old enough to have been brought up under minority rule and were there during the transition to majority rule and moved here after majority rule had a chance to 'bed in' and all thought that, by and large, things were going well back then. One of them, a native of Capetown, was considering moving back there as their SA family was getting older but after a trip to discuss it decided against as they felt that it was now simply unsafe there. This is, obviously, a précis of many conversations, over many years but I think it represents a fair summary.

Good post, thanks!

If the people of South Africa, decide to do a full "Zimbabwe", and end up ruining the country. I can accept that, as they made their own bed, and can lie in it if they want.

But what worries me, is when such craziness, comes over to the UK/West. Then people who mainly frequent this forum, who I suspect understand and support engineering and science, get alternative views, forced upon the country.

Maybe we need to vote in Richard Dawkins, as the next prime minster  (Joke).

I have heard, that if too many of the valid voters of a country, have problematic views/opinions. Such as what we have seen in that video. It can end up destroying the country in the longer term. As they vote in completely unsuitable candidates.

I think the girl/student is especially mixed up about science. Because Gravity/Newton, is NOT about Newton himself.

It is about having various experiments which any one can perform. Which demonstrate and prove that gravity exists, and justify the equations which the theories create.

It is not about if Newton was White or Black or whatever. Or if he was from South Africa or not.

It is about having sensible theories, which can be tested and proved in practice. Then if there is huge agreement among many other scientists can then lead to the theories of gravity, and its equations being added to Physics text books throughout the world.

Maybe this video, is a snapshot/example of how science/education is performing badly these days, especially in South Africa.

[Marco]

If the people of South Africa, decide to do a full "Zimbabwe", and end up ruining the country. I can accept that, as they made their own bed, and can lie in it if they want.

All the coming turmoil all over Africa will be blamed on climate change (the impact on per capita water resources from climate change relative to population growth being almost non existent not withstanding, in fact mentioning it will get you branded a racist).

[SeanB]

Well, the dept of Educashun wanted to improve the pass percentage, so reduced the cut off point for failing to around 16%, so that almost literally coming to the exam venue, copying your exam number from the paper you had with it printed on, and answering one question, would result in a pass. Then even that still did not work, so they simplified the exams, and introduced new STEM courses, maths literacy, which is basically how to write numbers down, and use a calculator to add them. No explanation of the principles of maths, and no showing of how you can do it without a calculator, no trigonometry or calculus, no geometry.

All this because the criterion for success is the ratio of students who pass, and this year there are over 100 000 students who have been pushed through to Gr12, even though they have failed Gr11, and who have very little chance of passing this year as well.  Add a rather dysfunctional department, with teachers striking for various reasons, ghost teachers ( on the payroll, but nowhere to be found), poorly trained teachers teaching subjects, classes that are way too big, schools that are in disrepair, and many more.

The Universities have been forced to add extra courses to the first year curricula, to basically bring the students there up to what the rest of the world calls a school leaving ability, including language, grammar, basic science concepts, basic literacy. Sadly only Engineering departments do this.

[wraper]

Or filling their car with petrol, accidentally spilling petrol all over themselves. Then lighting a cigarette, with disastrous consequences. I still can't easily understand how someone could do such a foolish thing. I guess the lighting the cigarette was such a constant habit, they did not even realize (consciously), they were doing it. Maybe that had something to do with it.

No cigarettes even needed.

[doobedoobedo]

If the people of South Africa, decide to do a full "Zimbabwe", and end up ruining the country. I can accept that, as they made their own bed, and can lie in it if they want.

All the coming turmoil all over Africa will be blamed on climate change (the impact on per capita water resources from climate change relative to population growth being almost non existent not withstanding, in fact mentioning it will get you branded a racist).

But climate change is racist.... https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/sep/06/climate-change-racist-crisis-london-city-airport-black-lives-matter

[daqq]

The word racist is beginning to lose all meanning it's being used so frequently.

The word racist has lost all meaning already. Currently it's mostly being used as a magic all powerful shield used when a member of some non-majority group does not like something.

[MK14]

Or filling their car with petrol, accidentally spilling petrol all over themselves. Then lighting a cigarette, with disastrous consequences. I still can't easily understand how someone could do such a foolish thing. I guess the lighting the cigarette was such a constant habit, they did not even realize (consciously), they were doing it. Maybe that had something to do with it.

No cigarettes even needed.

Thanks, I enjoyed that video.

It EXACTLY shows the point I was trying to make. Which is that people, who lack even the slightest knowledge/understanding about science (i.e. that Petrol is extremely flammable, and you must not put naked flames anywhere near it). Assuming they did not realize what they were doing, and were not directly doing it on purpose.
They may have ended up injuring themselves or worse.

In that video, I was surprised that the driver, did not park the car up, and immediately help the lady. He/she appeared to just drive off. The video ended too quickly to be exactly sure what happened. It is possible the driver was just finding a safe place to park, and then was going to rush out and help the lady.

EDIT:
It can get extremely cold in Russia (I guess that it where it is from). So maybe she was trying to use the lighter to melt some ice and/or heat something up, so she could hold it.

[doobedoobedo]

I finally decided to go and watch the video in the OP. I think this thread has largely missed the point and in so doing it has ironically reinforced the view the woman in the video was trying to make. The video was largely incomprehensible admittedly, but the word "decolonisation" did intrigue me. What does it mean? I didn't know it was a thing.

I'm not greatly interested in the subject so I didn't study it at any length but I did read this article.
https://theconversation.com/its-time-to-take-the-curriculum-back-from-dead-white-men-40268

I'm not recommending it, but it may help a little to understand the point-of-view of people who feel disenfranchised in the way science is taught as an exclusive domain of "dead-white-men". It never occurred to me that Arab, Indian or Chinese scholars were dead white men when their names were raised.  It never bothered me (a white fella) that other races were represented as making significant discoveries.  But I'm of course not in a marginalised minority either. Nor did I grow up in a country where I was very much a second class citizen. I think therein lies the reason for the reaction the woman in the video has. 

It wouldn't surprise me to learn that women would have some sympathy for the sentiment when confronted by the largely male curriculum.

The article you linked to seemed to be mainly about literature, which is of course subjective, and could be argued that it has a bias towards European origins when taught within Europe and former colonies. I can understand a kick-back against that in the former colonies, and for European students to wish to expand their horizons.

However, she was railing against science, which is not subjective, and so either shows that she has a complete lack of understanding of what science is, or is so blinded by bigotry that it doesn't matter. Possibly a combination of the two.

[dannyf]

I'm never a fan of Zuckerberg: this is a guy who insists that nations have an open border yet he is building a wall to keep the undesirables out of his mansion.

However, he recently wrote a piece in support of Peter Thiel's right to support Trump: http://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-memo-about-peter-thiel-and-donald-trump-2016-10

Zuckerberg himself is a diehard Clinto support. Two points I like in particular:

1: We care deeply about diversity. That's easy to say when it means standing up for ideas you agree with. It's a lot harder when it means standing up for the rights of people with different viewpoints to say what they care about. That's even more important.

2: We can't create a culture that says it cares about diversity and then excludes almost half the country because they back a political candidate.

The left has incredibly intolerant of views divergent from its own, as shown in the original video and subsequent discussions here. I hope they can learn a thing or two from Zuckerberg on that.

[dannyf]

On that diversity point, I view it as the separation of civilized people and barbarians. We are all passionate about what we do, and what you believe. we will fight to death to defend those rights for ourselves and our loved ones. Every barbarian can do that.

However, it is incredibly difficult to defend the rights of others who are different from us, who believe in something divergent from ours, ... It takes a giant to defend the rights of those who disagree with us.

People who do that are truly civilized.

[Marco]

Up to a point. I have no problem saying early infanticide leads to traumatized and callous cultures not worth preserving (ie. many aboriginal cultures and a few still existing). Better to uplift these people, erase the parts of their culture which are abhorrent and let them live under the illusion that the white man destroyed their noble savage previous existence from the comfort of modern civilization.

I don't care if others blame whites for all the ills in the world, but I wish whites would do it less. Someone has to fix the messes in the world. PC culture and the holy script of human rights can not do it, cultural relativism sees no evil (except whites).

PS. I guess even though I'm pro choice I have to admit that widespread abortion can lead to some of the same kind of callousness as in early cultures :/ I wish morality could be as simple for the secular as the religious.

[MK14]

I finally decided to go and watch the video in the OP. I think this thread has largely missed the point and in so doing it has ironically reinforced the view the woman in the video was trying to make. The video was largely incomprehensible admittedly, but the word "decolonisation" did intrigue me. What does it mean? I didn't know it was a thing.

I'm not greatly interested in the subject so I didn't study it at any length but I did read this article.
https://theconversation.com/its-time-to-take-the-curriculum-back-from-dead-white-men-40268

I'm not recommending it, but it may help a little to understand the point-of-view of people who feel disenfranchised in the way science is taught as an exclusive domain of "dead-white-men". It never occurred to me that Arab, Indian or Chinese scholars were dead white men when their names were raised.  It never bothered me (a white fella) that other races were represented as making significant discoveries.  But I'm of course not in a marginalised minority either. Nor did I grow up in a country where I was very much a second class citizen. I think therein lies the reason for the reaction the woman in the video has. 

It wouldn't surprise me to learn that women would have some sympathy for the sentiment when confronted by the largely male curriculum.

Thanks.
Your insightful post, has significantly improved my understanding of what point the student(s), were trying to convey. Without being directly in their shoes (in South Africa), it is difficult to see it from their point.
Because I am in the UK, it so happens that many of the scientists (historically), and discoveries were made or relate to the UK, and people of the UK.

Although (as another post has pointed out), it was probably more literature than science, the article you were talking about, was referring to. The concept/principle and thinking, were probably on similar lines.

When she was referring to the Black Magic voodoo, Witch Doctor (like) stuff, with the mind controlled lightning. She may have seen science's obvious rejection of such stuff, as being (from a scientific point of view) NONSENSE.
She may (incorrectly) believe that science is being discriminatory to her friends and fellow people (the voodoo/witches village), which could annoy a person. Especially if they think it has some merit.

The reality is that science is perfectly capable of allowing such phenomenon (mind controlled lightning). But it is NOT a matter of simply believing in it (faith). You have to scientifically prove that it is really true. With carefully engineered experiments. Which can then be reproduced by other science centres, giving confidence that there really is such an effect.

tl;dr
If Newton was unable to perform experiments, and mathematical proofs, and a lot of other stuff. To create his theory of Gravity and its equations. We probably would have never heard of him, and someone else, would have "discovered" gravity, and invented equations, which help Physicists work out how object(s) will behave, as regards gravity.

[Cerebus]

I'm never a fan of Zuckerberg: this is a guy who insists that nations have an open border yet he is building a wall to keep the undesirables out of his mansion.

However, he recently wrote a piece in support of Peter Thiel's right to support Trump: http://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-memo-about-peter-thiel-and-donald-trump-2016-10

Zuckerberg himself is a diehard Clinto support. Two points I like in particular:

1: We care deeply about diversity. That's easy to say when it means standing up for ideas you agree with. It's a lot harder when it means standing up for the rights of people with different viewpoints to say what they care about. That's even more important.

I think it's giving Zuckerberg too much credit to cite him for a point of view that is more classically attributed to Rene Descartes.

2: We can't create a culture that says it cares about diversity and then excludes almost half the country because they back a political candidate.

The left has incredibly intolerant of views divergent from its own, as shown in the original video and subsequent discussions here. I hope they can learn a thing or two from Zuckerberg on that.

It's got nothing to do with "the left", it's anybody with entrenched views at any point on the political spectrum. I always find it amusing that if I'm in a discussion with someone who agrees with me they ascribe my politics as the same as theirs. So I've been described by a Convervative Member of the House of Lords as a "libertarian" and by a Labour MP as a "socialist". I am in fact neither.

[MK14]

tl;dr
If Newton was unable to perform experiments, and mathematical proofs, and a lot of other stuff. To create his theory of Gravity and its equations. We probably would have never heard of him, and someone else, would have "discovered" gravity, and invented equations, which help Physicists work out how object(s) will behave, as regards gravity.

Possibly,possibly not. People of that intellect come about very infrequently, missing say a Newton may have set society back decades or centuries.

I agree. I've heard that he was a real genius/brilliant, and he may well have been really famous, even if he had investigated/improved/invented, a completely different branch of science/mathematics/engineering or similar.

If a time-machine, teleportation device, mass-duplicator and historical-time-displacements-messups, combined four functions (just mentioned), machine could be made. It would be very interesting to use it to make an exact copy of Newton, appear now.

What would he be like, and would he still be able to do brilliant things (in 2016+) ?

Would he be improved by modern knowledge, the phenomenal information base, called the internet, and meeting modern scientists. The ease of writing things using a computer, the huge communications systems and the fact he could use the massive CERN collider to do wonderful, ground breaking experiments.

Alternatively, would he get fat from modern fast food, waste time watching DVD's/blu-rays, playing video games, surfing the internet, facebook/forums, etc etc. Effectively NOT succeeding at getting anything (useful) done ?

[Cerebus]

I have no problem saying early infanticide leads to traumatized and callous cultures not worth preserving (ie. many aboriginal cultures and a few still existing).

Don't forget that Roman and Classical Greek civilizations are both well documented as practising elective infanticide. i.e. it's not merely primitive cultures that have practices this.

[Marco]

Don't forget that Roman and Classical Greek civilizations are both well documented as practising elective infanticide. i.e. it's not merely primitive cultures that have practices this.

Late infanticide at least it happens outside of the view of the living children. Less traumatic.

[Cerebus]

I have no problem saying early infanticide leads to traumatized and callous cultures not worth preserving (ie. many aboriginal cultures and a few still existing).

Don't forget that Roman and Classical Greek civilizations are both well documented as practising elective infanticide. i.e. it's not merely primitive cultures that have practices this.

They stopped though.

I think that was more a product of their civilizations collapsing than a reasoned choice - I'm open to being corrected by a better classical scholar than me.

[vodka]

What would he be like, and would he still be able to do brilliant things (in 2016+) ?

Would he be improved by modern knowledge, the phenomenal information base, called the internet, and meeting modern scientists. The ease of writing things using a computer, the huge communications systems and the fact he could use the massive CERN collider to do wonderful, ground breaking experiments.

Alternatively, would he get fat from modern fast food, waste time watching DVD's/blu-rays, playing video games, surfing the internet, facebook/forums, etc etc. Effectively NOT succeeding at getting anything (useful) done ?

If you see the last 30 years old , i see that haven't had a great revolution technologic on the world on comparation with the great revolution of the 50s decade.

 i explain. If we catch a man borned in the 50s decade. This man when he will be 30 years ,he will have lived a great revolution , per example the step the thermoinic valve to bipolar or field effect transistors.

Now ,this man have a child  and  his  son born in the 80s decade, and when this child will be 30 years old, he compare the evolution technologic that has had since that he born versus when  his father (since his father born until the father was 30 years old).

Therefore  the son realizes that the evolution  technologic has braked abruptly.

[Rick Law]

...
...
It wouldn't surprise me to learn that women would have some sympathy for the sentiment when confronted by the largely male curriculum.

While literature is a matter of culture, when it come to science, it applies to all culture, all race and all geographic regions (on earth).

The lady in the video has a perspective problem with little to do with a "largely male curriculum".  Her problem is a "chip on the shoulder" problem.  Colonization is her chosen "go-to" reason for things not of her liking.  She exhibited a readiness to just apply that label and not think more but instead rant and/or suppress objections.

Such view in private and other locale may be a mere silliness, but such view in a university setting along with the desire to suppress is a mixture entirely counter productive to the charter of a university.  Had there been a respectful exchange of ideas, whether minds were change or not, UCT would have painted the world an entirely different picture of itself.

[kxenos]

I have no problem saying early infanticide leads to traumatized and callous cultures not worth preserving (ie. many aboriginal cultures and a few still existing).

Don't forget that Roman and Classical Greek civilizations are both well documented as practising elective infanticide. i.e. it's not merely primitive cultures that have practices this.

They stopped though.

I think that was more a product of their civilizations collapsing than a reasoned choice - I'm open to being corrected by a better classical scholar than me.

I'm not sure about the ancient Greeks but the Romans stopped around the time of conversion to Christianity. There are no western Countries that I'm aware of that allow it today or in the last at least several hundred years as far as I know. I will yield to a more knowledgeable history buff on when it was banished from Western civilisation.

This practice was actually legal back then but it's stopped centuries ago. During the first 5 days of the infant's life, the father had the right to "reject" the newborn. He didn't have the right to kill it directly though. He was allowed to leave it in a public place. Sometimes if the newborn didn't have any visible deficits an other family would adapt and raise the child, but most of the infants died. This practice wasn't considered murder but what we now would name abortion (it was named hekvoli).

[MK14]

If you see the last 30 years old , i see that haven't had a great revolution technologic on the world on comparation with the great revolution of the 50s decade.

 i explain. If we catch a man borned in the 50s decade. This man when he will be 30 years ,he will have lived a great revolution , per example the step the thermoinic valve to bipolar or field effect transistors.

Now ,this man have a child  and  his  son born in the 80s decade, and when this child will be 30 years old, he compare the evolution technologic that has had since that he born versus when  his father (since his father born until the father was 30 years old).

Therefore  the son realizes that the evolution  technologic has braked abruptly.

I generally agree.

The big electronics inventions of Electricity, Relays, Valves (tubes), Germanium Transistors, Silicon Transistors, Integrated Circuits, Op-Amps (IC), Digital Logic ICs, Microprocessors/MCUs, FPGAs etc. Have already occurred (I may have missed some) mostly BEFORE the year 2,000.

What is tending to happen these days, is that proper/big fresh inventions, are mostly not happening. But electronics has become so cheap (in general), that it is being used and has spread into all sorts of things. Which 50 years go, would NOT have been electronic.
E.g. Christmas cards, with a built in IC, to play tunes.

Cars have gone from having little electronics in them in the 1950's, to having huge quantities, of electronics, for all sorts of controllers/motors and amazing functionality. Even involving the beginnings of automatically driving itself, where ever the user desires.

tl;dr
Although many inventions have already occurred. There is still room to move electronics into new areas.

[Marco]

I'm not sure about the ancient Greeks but the Romans stopped around the time of conversion to Christianity. There are no western Countries that I'm aware of that allow it today or in the last at least several hundred years as far as I know. I will yield to a more knowledgeable history buff on when it was banished from Western civilisation.

After the plague up till today we didn't really have to any more, it also ended the stranglehold on power of feudalism. One man's black death is another man's birth of modern civilization.

[AntiProtonBoy]

I'm never a fan of Zuckerberg: this is a guy who insists that nations have an open border yet he is building a wall to keep the undesirables out of his mansion.

How is his opinions about foreign policy relevant to the desire of maintaining privacy on his own private property?

[EEVblog]

When she was referring to the Black Magic voodoo, Witch Doctor (like) stuff, with the mind controlled lightning. She may have seen science's obvious rejection of such stuff, as being (from a scientific point of view) NONSENSE.
She may (incorrectly) believe that science is being discriminatory to her friends and fellow people (the voodoo/witches village), which could annoy a person. Especially if they think it has some merit.

The reality is that science is perfectly capable of allowing such phenomenon (mind controlled lightning). But it is NOT a matter of simply believing in it (faith). You have to scientifically prove that it is really true. With carefully engineered experiments. Which can then be reproduced by other science centres, giving confidence that there really is such an effect.

The problem is also that people who believe this stuff (religion is the same thing) think that just because it's "possible" means that it deserves equal "respect" and a equal platform for discussion. And likewise that the probability of such a thing being true is the same as something that's not obviously batshit crazy.

[EEVblog]

What that OP video shows is the seeds of discontent.
The only criticism I have of the woman in the video is that for all her passion she did not articulate her point well for the understanding of people not already aware of the issues she is struggling with.

She got across her point well enough, scrap science and start again, because *insert pointless reason here*. She's a delusional fool and is in dire need of some proper basic education.
It is astonishing that a person of her age at university, and likely of otherwise normal intelligence level on other subjects, can be so deluded.
Yes, countless millions of ordinary students her age are deluded that their imaginary sky fairy exists, but at least you can be excused because of the system over countless generations that has enabled that delusion. But in this case she dug her own delusion grave that's right up there with flat earthers.

[MK14]

The problem is also that people who believe this stuff (religion is the same thing) think that just because it's "possible" means that it deserves equal "respect" and a equal platform for discussion. And likewise that the probability of such a thing being true is the same as something that's not obviously batshit crazy.

I relate to that a lot. Unfortunately, from experience, I know that trying to change a persons opinion (e.g. in their religion), is extremely unlikely to succeed. Also there is a significant risk of annoying the other person, and ruining any relationship, one has with them. E.g. Friendship.

One of the problems is that when someone I'm talking to, believes in something, purely because of faith. Such as ghosts or UFO's really exist. I can say that no scientific proof for their existence, has come to light. At least not officially.
I.e. Science generally does NOT believe they exist. (Ghosts, UFO's etc).

But I can't 100% absolutely say they don't exist. There is still a (probably tiny chance), that for some weird reason, they have not been officially scientifically discovered yet. So I am sort of forced to be honest, and have to leave them to believe in it. Although I can attack it, if they have specific experiences, which have led them to that belief.

[Cerebus]

One of the problems is that when someone I'm talking to, believes in something, purely because of faith. Such as ghosts or UFO's really exist. I can say that no scientific proof for their existence, has come to light. At least not officially.
I.e. Science generally does NOT believe they exist. (Ghosts, UFO's etc).

But I can't 100% absolutely say they don't exist. There is still a (probably tiny chance), that for some weird reason, they have not been officially scientifically discovered yet. So I am sort of forced to be honest, and have to leave them to believe in it. Although I can attack it, if they have specific experiences, which have led them to that belief.

There's a nasty hole between the things that are reasonably provable*, and the things that are reasonably disprovable. The existence of some godlike creature/creatures falls exactly into this hole. That is why, as a decent scientist, as far as what I can prove* I cannot call myself an atheist. As a scientist I am forced to accept the label of being an agnostic, as I don't have the evidence to be otherwise. Atheism is a faith based position because it isn't supported by falsifiable evidence, just belief. Oh sure, the balance of probabilities supports an atheistic position, but the balance of probabilities isn't the same thing as a good rigorous proof. This argument annoys the heck out of some atheists; almost as much as some atheists annoy the heck out of religionists.

*Reasonably provable/disprovable here should be taken to mean the usual standards of scientific proof. Scientific proof is never absolute, it is subject to revision when better data/experiments come along. Once upon a time we could prove that electrons orbit an atom like planets but once we'd got got better theories and data to back them up we could prove that they are more like a charge cloud of probabilities.

**Standing on top of a hill during a thunderstorm yelling "All gods are bastards" does not stand scrutiny as a rigorous scientific test of the non-existence of the said gods.

[AntiProtonBoy]

Behold! Black magic:

[G7PSK]

What would he be like, and would he still be able to do brilliant things (in 2016+) ?

Would he be improved by modern knowledge, the phenomenal information base, called the internet, and meeting modern scientists. The ease of writing things using a computer, the huge communications systems and the fact he could use the massive CERN collider to do wonderful, ground breaking experiments.

Alternatively, would he get fat from modern fast food, waste time watching DVD's/blu-rays, playing video games, surfing the internet, facebook/forums, etc etc. Effectively NOT succeeding at getting anything (useful) done ?

If you see the last 30 years old , i see that haven't had a great revolution technologic on the world on comparation with the great revolution of the 50s decade.

 i explain. If we catch a man borned in the 50s decade. This man when he will be 30 years ,he will have lived a great revolution , per example the step the thermoinic valve to bipolar or field effect transistors.

Now ,this man have a child  and  his  son born in the 80s decade, and when this child will be 30 years old, he compare the evolution technologic that has had since that he born versus when  his father (since his father born until the father was 30 years old).

Therefore  the son realizes that the evolution  technologic has braked abruptly.

The advances being made now have moved to the biological field with a greater and greater understanding of how things like cells work right down to the atomic level. The last half of the 19th century and the first half of the 20th were mechanical and electrical with the dawning of electronic era. the second half of the 20th century was improvement of electronics and so far the 21st century has been about improved communication systems and the birth of bio engineering. For many people the advances have been so fast it scares them they feel left behind and they turn back turn fundamental type religion of one type or another.

[EEVblog]

Off-topic post deleted.
If this thread gets off-topic again I'll lock it.

[madires]

She got across her point well enough, scrap science and start again, because *insert pointless reason here*. She's a delusional fool and is in dire need of some proper basic education.
It is astonishing that a person of her age at university, and likely of otherwise normal intelligence level on other subjects, can be so deluded.
Yes, countless millions of ordinary students her age are deluded that their imaginary sky fairy exists, but at least you can be excused because of the system over countless generations that has enabled that delusion. But in this case she dug her own delusion grave that's right up there with flat earthers.

I don't think that an education in the meaning of school/university would fix this. It might be the mental instability, not having got some guidance from parents, frightened by a lack of future, not seeing a way they want to walk and asking who they are and what they should do in this crazy world. Young people in that state can be easily absorbed by polical groups and bad ideas. It happens again and again. At the moment young muslims in the EU go to Syria to fight for ISIS. Not far off from burning tires in front of the university. We should lend those young people a hand to find their way before they do stupid or bad things. And it would be a good investment, because it would solve several problems.

[Zero999]

I'm never a fan of Zuckerberg: this is a guy who insists that nations have an open border yet he is building a wall to keep the undesirables out of his mansion.

However, he recently wrote a piece in support of Peter Thiel's right to support Trump: http://www.businessinsider.com/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-memo-about-peter-thiel-and-donald-trump-2016-10

Zuckerberg himself is a diehard Clinto support. Two points I like in particular:

1: We care deeply about diversity. That's easy to say when it means standing up for ideas you agree with. It's a lot harder when it means standing up for the rights of people with different viewpoints to say what they care about. That's even more important.

2: We can't create a culture that says it cares about diversity and then excludes almost half the country because they back a political candidate.

The left has incredibly intolerant of views divergent from its own, as shown in the original video and subsequent discussions here. I hope they can learn a thing or two from Zuckerberg on that.

I agree with promoting anyone's right to believe in what they want. I'd like to see many of the silly hate laws abolished. I'm not saying it's all right to plot to commit murder but laws which prohibit people from saying bad things about other religions and races are oppressive. If someone wants to ban science because they view it to be racist, then they're entitled to do so, the same as someone else who hates others because of the colour of their skin. Simply banning people from saying/thinking bad things does nothing but drive the problem underground.

Now I'm of the opinion that Trump is a revolting slug and Clinton would be a better president. I think both have as much right as one another to campaign for presidency and say what they like, even if it pisses off certain people.

[daqq]

We should lend those young people a hand to find their way before they do stupid or bad things.

I'm not sure how to help people who despise everything you, the EU and western culture stand for.

[AlxDroidDev]

The only criticism I have of the woman in the video is that for all her passion she did not articulate her point well for the understanding of people not already aware of the issues she is struggling with.

Her biggest struggle is that she's brain dead. She might be really upset that western science hasn't come up with a way to revive neurons yet.

If she wants to create a "new science", based on black magic, voodoo, rain dances and the like, she's welcome to do it all by herself without destroying what has already been created, proven. She's even welcome to submit her paper on "African Science" to Nature or other journals, or even start her own "Journal of African Science".

What makes her a total hypocrite is that she (a) wants to destroy something in order to create something totally unrelated; (b) embraces the science she wants to destroy; (c) has no idea what science is; (d) is more interested in the destructing that in creating.

People that want to destroy something because of their stupid beliefs are very dangerous people. Call them jihadists, terrorists, extremists, or whatever... their way of thinking is pretty much the same: they are more interested in destroying than in creating. The people in the video who are defending this stupid idea are as dangerous as jihadists.

PS.1: medicine as a science started in the Middle East, so technically it isn't strictly western science. Even if that science isn't destroyed, she still won't have her dead brain back.

PS.2: technically, science developed in Oceania, South Korea, Japan and China cannot be called western science. So, I guess she's ok with destroying American science, as long as whatever has been developed by Samsung, LG, Sony, Canon, Nikon, Nissan, Honda, etc is not destroyed!

[madires]

We should lend those young people a hand to find their way before they do stupid or bad things.

I'm not sure how to help people who despise everything you, the EU and western culture stand for.

Take them seriously, don't oppose them directly, don't try to prove you're right (or they're wrong) and ask questions to steer them into the right direction to think about what the impact of their ideas would be. How would it change their life? Would it improve anything? IMHO, in most cases the ideas are of a short term nature. So make them think about the long term impacts and also aspects they might have missed.

[madires]

We should lend those young people a hand to find their way before they do stupid or bad things. And it would be a good investment, because it would solve several problems.

Any intervention by the west there never ends well.

I don't think any western goverment help we be coming anytime soon. There are private charties active in the country but it's questionable if they are doing more harm then good.

I fully agree. But I haven't meant that anyway. That kind of support can't come directy from the ouside, it has to be provided by the sane people around the deluded young ones.

[Cerebus]

After apartheid they went and burnt most if not all white farms, killed whites and also destroyed most of their infrastructer. The logical thing to do would be either buy out the white farmers so you could actually still feed your population. Get the existing farmers to train the new ones so they could be successful instead of killing or displacing them. The phrase "cut off your nose to spite your face" comes to mind. Most goverments are corrupt or populated by idiots but theirs is the extreme of that as pointed out by people in this thread who actually live there.

Please get your facts right. That happened in Zimbabwe. In South Africa the final transition from apartheid to majority rule went pretty peaceably. They certainly did not go and "burnt most if not all white farms, killed whites and also destroyed most of their infrastructer[sic]".

[MK14]

If Newton was unable to perform experiments, and mathematical proofs, and a lot of other stuff. To create his theory of Gravity and its equations. We probably would have never heard of him, and someone else, would have "discovered" gravity, and invented equations, which help Physicists work out how object(s) will behave, as regards gravity.

This reminded me of another point. Prof Jarred Diamond published a book "Guns, Germs and Steel" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guns,_Germs,_and_Steel)
Which describes his theory of how it was that European culture came to dominate the world through colonialisation. Whether he is right or not is yet to be determined, but it is a well rounded and considered book. Even if it is a bit of work to get through. It certainly provokes a bit of discussion on other internet forums.

The relevant point that reminded me was that in order for Newton (et al) to make these discoveries they needed to be fortunate enough to live in a society that could afford the luxury of not needing everyone involved in full time activity to ensure basic survival. That society needed sufficiently productive soils and regular seasonal rain to permit farming agriculture reliably, suitable animals that could be domesticated. If you look around the world at animals that colonial powers have brought with them pigs, goats, sheep, horses, chickens and cows they are all readily available to Europeans and easily able to be domesticated and modified through breeding to better meet the need of humans. You can't domesticate a zebra or a kangaroo or a lion and you can't breed elephants.

Even in European societies the discoveries were made in large part by wealthy people or by people who could gain the patronage of wealth. The black/white divide is an interesting parallel to a peasant/nobility class divide. We are now developing a wealth divide and that too is sowing the seeds of discontent and may ultimately lead to revolution if taken to the extreme.  What that OP video shows is the seeds of discontent.

The only criticism I have of the woman in the video is that for all her passion she did not articulate her point well for the understanding of people not already aware of the issues she is struggling with.

PS. Guns Germs and Steel is worth the effort to read it.

Thanks, that is an interesting way of looking back on history, and working out WHY and HOW, things happened the way they have.
Also thanks for the "Guns Germs and Steel", reading recommendation.
Since I'd probably have to mention contentious country/historical stuff...
I've intentionally left out commenting more thoroughly, to help keep this thread on-topic.
(Which I agree with, as we want to keep this forum, sane. If we ever do have a political section, it needs to be a separate part of the forum.)

[MK14]

There's a nasty hole between the things that are reasonably provable*, and the things that are reasonably disprovable. The existence of some godlike creature/creatures falls exactly into this hole. That is why, as a decent scientist, as far as what I can prove* I cannot call myself an atheist. As a scientist I am forced to accept the label of being an agnostic, as I don't have the evidence to be otherwise. Atheism is a faith based position because it isn't supported by falsifiable evidence, just belief. Oh sure, the balance of probabilities supports an atheistic position, but the balance of probabilities isn't the same thing as a good rigorous proof. This argument annoys the heck out of some atheists; almost as much as some atheists annoy the heck out of religionists.

*Reasonably provable/disprovable here should be taken to mean the usual standards of scientific proof. Scientific proof is never absolute, it is subject to revision when better data/experiments come along. Once upon a time we could prove that electrons orbit an atom like planets but once we'd got got better theories and data to back them up we could prove that they are more like a charge cloud of probabilities.

**Standing on top of a hill during a thunderstorm yelling "All gods are bastards" does not stand scrutiny as a rigorous scientific test of the non-existence of the said gods.

But if someone is "agnostic", then one can jump in and say that even that needs faith. Because the assumptions/calculations/beliefs/thoughts which lead one to be "agnostic", may be as much faith, as it is scientific.

But in all fairness, if you have to choose between atheist, agnostic and believing in one or more of the religions. The agnostic choice may be the most, scientific one. But I guess that is debatable.

I guess science does not handle the situation where way too little information is available. So you just have to make the best guess you can, as to the best course of action. Although science does sometimes handle even that situation. By using things like statistics and reasoning to determine the best action, considering the probabilities involved.

E.g. Science can't tell if it will rain or not, in exactly 365 days time. But it will allow me to determine that there is a 36% probability (made up figure) that it will rain, where I am, at that time of year, in exactly one years time.

Hence I can use the 36%, to work out how much to spend on rain protections, and how much resources to spend on the 64% chance it does not rain.

It would be interesting to know why people such as that student have been so disenfranchised by modern scientific institutions (Universities). When it gets to the point that they are actively harming or destroying Universities. It becomes a serious problem for that country.

E.g. Doctors, Engineers, Scientists etc etc. Would cease to exist (new ones that is, there would still be officially trained ones coming from other countries). Hence hospitals, power stations, water supplies would get in danger of having to stop or shut down.

I hope that South Africa can solve their problems, and sort this out. If that student in the video is NOT a ONE-OFF, they could be going down a sad path.

[Cerebus]

There really are no reliable facts. I’m basing my opinion on my memory of the news coverage back then. All the stats even now are unreliable and biased to the group writing them. For every source I can find that says violence escalated after apartheid there is another that says it didn’t. I was just a kid when this all happened but the news at the time was full of clips of riots and murder and destruction of property. Mandela’s wife was portrayed as a brutal corrupt killer as well. This is what I remember, if you have actually unbiased data please share.

I think your "memory of the news coverage" is of Zimbabwe, where there was a veritable bloodbath that continues in some form to this day. But that didn't happen in South Africa. Events in South Africa are sufficiently recent that you can't appeal to historical fog or biased reporting when, if events unfolded as you suggest, there would be reams of newsprint and miles of footage from generally reliable sources such as the BBC to support your assertion.

That doesn't mean there have been no incidents at all but that's a far way from "After apartheid they went and burnt most if not all white farms, killed whites and also destroyed most of their infrastructer".

In general, violence in South Africa has increased overall since majority rule but that is in general, not in any particularly racially slanted way. To get some perspective, between the start of majority rule (1994) and March 2012 there have been 361,015 murders in all of South Africa and between 1990 and March 2012, there had been 1,544 murders on South African farms of which 208 of the victims were black. [Official police figures quoted in the article you cite]. So that's 0.4% (not adjusted for the non-overlapping time frame) of all those murders that occurred on farms, which might be attacks on the farms of the sort you imply, or might just be murders that happened to be on farms. If someone told me that 0.4% of the murders in the UK happened on farms I wouldn't regard that as indicative of any particular farm based trend, I'd just think it just reflected the number of people who lived on farms.

[G7PSK]

If Newton was unable to perform experiments, and mathematical proofs, and a lot of other stuff. To create his theory of Gravity and its equations. We probably would have never heard of him, and someone else, would have "discovered" gravity, and invented equations, which help Physicists work out how object(s) will behave, as regards gravity.

This reminded me of another point. Prof Jarred Diamond published a book "Guns, Germs and Steel" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guns,_Germs,_and_Steel)
Which describes his theory of how it was that European culture came to dominate the world through colonialisation. Whether he is right or not is yet to be determined, but it is a well rounded and considered book. Even if it is a bit of work to get through. It certainly provokes a bit of discussion on other internet forums.

The relevant point that reminded me was that in order for Newton (et al) to make these discoveries they needed to be fortunate enough to live in a society that could afford the luxury of not needing everyone involved in full time activity to ensure basic survival. That society needed sufficiently productive soils and regular seasonal rain to permit farming agriculture reliably, suitable animals that could be domesticated. If you look around the world at animals that colonial powers have brought with them pigs, goats, sheep, horses, chickens and cows they are all readily available to Europeans and easily able to be domesticated and modified through breeding to better meet the need of humans. You can't domesticate a zebra or a kangaroo or a lion and you can't breed elephants.

Even in European societies the discoveries were made in large part by wealthy people or by people who could gain the patronage of wealth. The black/white divide is an interesting parallel to a peasant/nobility class divide. We are now developing a wealth divide and that too is sowing the seeds of discontent and may ultimately lead to revolution if taken to the extreme.  What that OP video shows is the seeds of discontent.

The only criticism I have of the woman in the video is that for all her passion she did not articulate her point well for the understanding of people not already aware of the issues she is struggling with.

PS. Guns Germs and Steel is worth the effort to read it.

Thanks, that is an interesting way of looking back on history, and working out WHY and HOW, things happened the way they have.
Also thanks for the "Guns Germs and Steel", reading recommendation.
Since I'd probably have to mention contentious country/historical stuff...
I've intentionally left out commenting more thoroughly, to help keep this thread on-topic.
(Which I agree with, as we want to keep this forum, sane. If we ever do have a political section, it needs to be a separate part of the forum.)

Have not read the book, but gun powder was invented by the Chinese, guns by the Arabs and Indians, steel came from multiple countries around the world and the most influential germ from China (black death). What set Europe on the path of further development of these was reformation of the church ie we stopped burning people who came up with new theory and developments whereas the Arab world went the other way. But it is wrong to blame any modern ill on the past actions of our ancestors as on the whole they did what they saw as right according to the morals of the day. You cant judge the past by today's morals as they will quite likely be different in the future.

[Cerebus]

But if someone is "agnostic", then one can jump in and say that even that needs faith. Because the assumptions/calculations/beliefs/thoughts which lead one to be "agnostic", may be as much faith, as it is scientific.

The term "agnostic" has Greek roots. The "a-" prefix meaning "without" and "gnosis" being knowledge (strict translation) or special insight (a common implication of the word when discussing something mystical). So it's just a way of saying "a person who claims no knowledge or special [mystical] insight" so it's just saying "I'm not in a position to know" or "I'm ignorant" (in the proper sense of ignorant) or "I cannot know". I don't think that such a profession of of ignorance is a position that could be construed as requiring faith.

[Cerebus]

I just found something very telling in a report that AcHmed99 pointed me to:

The Hofmeyr being referred to below had claimed that many white farmers were being killed in South Africa, and the report in question basically demolished this on the basis of available facts. The quote below was about Hofmeyr's rebuttal.

Hofmeyr’s strongest argument boiled down to this: “Far more than facts, it is people’s emotions and experiences that matter … So ‘our people die like flies’ is still applicable, emotionally – and does not need to be supported by facts.”

Now doesn't that kind of thinking sound remarkably like the kind of thinking used by the lass who's the principal subject of discussion here. Remember the speaker here is a white Afrikaner. Perhaps we have a glimmer here of where she learned that  kind of thinking from.

[dannyf]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/the-professor-vs-the-pronoun-warriors/article32474079/

Intolerance is everywhere, as evidence in this very thread and the story above, courtesy of our friends from Canada.

[MK14]

But if someone is "agnostic", then one can jump in and say that even that needs faith. Because the assumptions/calculations/beliefs/thoughts which lead one to be "agnostic", may be as much faith, as it is scientific.

The term "agnostic" has Greek roots. The "a-" prefix meaning "without" and "gnosis" being knowledge (strict translation) or special insight (a common implication of the word when discussing something mystical). So it's just a way of saying "a person who claims no knowledge or special [mystical] insight" so it's just saying "I'm not in a position to know" or "I'm ignorant" (in the proper sense of ignorant) or "I cannot know". I don't think that such a profession of of ignorance is a position that could be construed as requiring faith.

That makes a lot of sense, thanks for the explanation!

I was going too far, to claim that it needed faith, to be agnostic. In almost all situations, it does not, need faith to be agnostic, I agree.

Being Pedantic, the only exception I can (quickly) see, is if someone had very significant first hand experience, of Ghosts/UFO's etc. In which case, going agnostic (or its direct equivalency as regards Ghosts/UFO's), would probably need at least some faith.
E.g. Faith that it was just some powerful bright lights from a secret military aircraft and the object which landed near you, was just an experimental weather balloon, which the military are messing with, near area 51.
But even in that situation, I can agree/accept, that even that does not necessarily count as needing faith, especially if you are a scientist.

[diyaudio]

I don't live too far away from where this madness is taking place, funny I was rejected by the same university 10 years ago... reverse karma.

[Cerebus]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/the-professor-vs-the-pronoun-warriors/article32474079/

Intolerance is everywhere, as evidence in this very thread and the story above, courtesy of our friends from Canada.

Ye gods! Transgendered people have a tough enough time as it without some kooks persuading them that they ought to insist on special personalised pronouns being inserted in the the language for them. I know several transgendered people and none of them has ever asked for anything more than being addressed with the normal pronoun for the gender they identify as i.e. He or she.

[Rick Law]

If Newton was unable to perform experiments, and mathematical proofs, and a lot of other stuff. To create his theory of Gravity and its equations. We probably would have never heard of him, and someone else, would have "discovered" gravity, and invented equations, which help Physicists work out how object(s) will behave, as regards gravity.

...
Which describes his theory of how it was that European culture came to dominate the world through colonialisation. Whether he is right or not is yet to be determined, but it is a well rounded and considered book. Even if it is a bit of work to get through. It certainly provokes a bit of discussion on other internet forums.

The relevant point that reminded me was that in order for Newton (et al) to make these discoveries they needed to be fortunate enough to live in a society that could afford the luxury of not needing everyone involved in full time activity to ensure basic survival
...
...
The only criticism I have of the woman in the video is that for all her passion she did not articulate her point well for the understanding of people not already aware of the issues she is struggling with.

PS. Guns Germs and Steel is worth the effort to read it.

Newton is not really the point here.  If it was not Newton, it would have been someone else.  She could have chosen Schrodinger (and cat) and object to how ridiculous that sounds compared to what our "common sense" tell us every day.

The pertinent point is, she clearly rejects modern ways of obtaining knowledge and the resulting knowledge.  So, why is she in an institution where such knowledge and methods of gathering such knowledge are taught?  In my opinion, the most important point missed in the society's debate is: there is a cost to society far exceeding the cost of her 4 years there.  There is a cost of society when that presence drags down the standard of that institution, thereby drags down the society she is in.

A counter point may be: is she proposing improvement to our way of obtaining knowledge?  Is her proposal valid?  Are we simply wrong?  However, from her body language, it is clear she was not interested in any challenges to her ideas.  (The lady in white lecturing objectors is not the issue here, it could be bad house-rules.)

There was (is?) a debate that when an abortionist tribe is discovered, should we "the civilized" try to bring up their way of life or left them undisturbed.

(This is a pretend tribe, so these are suppositions) Pros:
- no more head-hunting your neighbors
- boys doesn't have to kill a lion to say he is now an adult
- girls doesn't have to marry the guy with the biggest biceps whether she likes it or not
...
Cons:
- gone is another human language
- gone is another piece of human history

May be people like the young lady in the video should be just left alone, and not to expose them to modern society that destroys her culture.  True that she may be living in a condition the rest of the "civilized world" will reject, but if it is her choice to reject civilized knowledge anyhow...

So, is her society benefited by educating her?

[MK14]

Have not read the book, but gun powder was invented by the Chinese, guns by the Arabs and Indians, steel came from multiple countries around the world and the most influential germ from China (black death). What set Europe on the path of further development of these was reformation of the church ie we stopped burning people who came up with new theory and developments whereas the Arab world went the other way. But it is wrong to blame any modern ill on the past actions of our ancestors as on the whole they did what they saw as right according to the morals of the day. You cant judge the past by today's morals as they will quite likely be different in the future.

I agree, that in general, blaming us for things which happened hundreds of years ago, is not a good idea. There were so many thousands of wars, battles and other bad things, it would get completely silly and out of hand. Some/Many/Most countries use to belong to other people. E.g. US/Australia etc. It is best to accept things the way they are, in general, and go from there.
But recent things, such as Russia stealing Crimea, is another matter.

I presume it was things like the printing press, which were major milestones, in the development of modern, western societies.
"The pen (writing/printing), is mightier than the sword".
The printing press = mass quantity of affordable books = spreading of knowledge in scientific/mathematical and other subject areas.

Printing press = successful societies.

But I agree, the lowering of the significance of religion, and the ability to win battles, to defend yourself (and less honorable uses of weapons), are very important aspects as well.

I guess the modern day printing press, is now the internet and computers.

[CatalinaWOW]

I think your "memory of the news coverage" is of Zimbabwe, where there was a veritable bloodbath that continues in some form to this day. But that didn't happen in South Africa. Events in South Africa are sufficiently recent that you can't appeal to historical fog or biased reporting when, if events unfolded as you suggest, there would be reams of newsprint and miles of footage from generally reliable sources such as the BBC to support your assertion.

That doesn't mean there have been no incidents at all but that's a far way from "After apartheid they went and burnt most if not all white farms, killed whites and also destroyed most of their infrastructer".

In general, violence in South Africa has increased overall since majority rule but that is in general, not in any particularly racially slanted way. To get some perspective, between the start of majority rule (1994) and March 2012 there have been 361,015 murders in all of South Africa and between 1990 and March 2012, there had been 1,544 murders on South African farms of which 208 of the victims were black. [Official police figures quoted in the article you cite]. So that's 0.4% (not adjusted for the non-overlapping time frame) of all those murders that occurred on farms, which might be attacks on the farms of the sort you imply, or might just be murders that happened to be on farms. If someone told me that 0.4% of the murders in the UK happened on farms I wouldn't regard that as indicative of any particular farm based trend, I'd just think it just reflected the number of people who lived on farms.

Well thank you for clearing that up. I stand corrected.

There is an important way in which perceptions are more important than facts, and it applies to the whites of South Africa as much as it does to the young lady in the video. 

Regardless of how benign the transition in South Africa really was, a great many whites believed that it would go as other African countries had gone and feared it, feared violence, feared loss of power, whatever.  They left the country as result of those fears, taking their skills and much of their fortunes with them.  I have met several of these folks, and know of many more.  Those people some or all of their accumulated wealth and the land they grew up in and the experience with that society.  South Africa has lost much, though I can't say if it is measurable, significant or dominant.

This young lady is of the opinion that she has been oppressed by white science, and is planning to live her life based on that belief.  There will be consequences for her and the society that she lives in.  Most of us would agree that those consequences will benefit neither her or her society, but they are going to happen because of her perceptions. 

[doobedoobedo]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/the-professor-vs-the-pronoun-warriors/article32474079/

Intolerance is everywhere, as evidence in this very thread and the story above, courtesy of our friends from Canada.

Uh, did you even read that article? Heres a relevent quote.

---snip---

Better still listen to the man speak - starts around 2 minutes in after the anti-free-speech protesters have finished messing with the sound equipment

[EEVblog]

If someone wants to ban science because they view it to be racist, then they're entitled to do so

And they must except that virtually the entire human population will laugh at them and rightfully deny them their platform to put forth such a monumentally stupid idea.

[EEVblog]

There's a nasty hole between the things that are reasonably provable*, and the things that are reasonably disprovable. The existence of some godlike creature/creatures falls exactly into this hole. That is why, as a decent scientist, as far as what I can prove* I cannot call myself an atheist. As a scientist I am forced to accept the label of being an agnostic, as I don't have the evidence to be otherwise. Atheism is a faith based position because it isn't supported by falsifiable evidence, just belief. Oh sure, the balance of probabilities supports an atheistic position, but the balance of probabilities isn't the same thing as a good rigorous proof. This argument annoys the heck out of some atheists; almost as much as some atheists annoy the heck out of religionists.

*Reasonably provable/disprovable here should be taken to mean the usual standards of scientific proof. Scientific proof is never absolute, it is subject to revision when better data/experiments come along. Once upon a time we could prove that electrons orbit an atom like planets but once we'd got got better theories and data to back them up we could prove that they are more like a charge cloud of probabilities.

**Standing on top of a hill during a thunderstorm yelling "All gods are bastards" does not stand scrutiny as a rigorous scientific test of the non-existence of the said gods.

But if someone is "agnostic", then one can jump in and say that even that needs faith. Because the assumptions/calculations/beliefs/thoughts which lead one to be "agnostic", may be as much faith, as it is scientific.

But in all fairness, if you have to choose between atheist, agnostic and believing in one or more of the religions. The agnostic choice may be the most, scientific one. But I guess that is debatable.

You bet it's debatable, because you'll have a hard time finding any serious atheist who 100% believes there is no god. The atheist position is simply that there is zero credible evidence for any of the thousands of gods. And more to that, the fact that so many contradict one another and also themselves, and the fact that their holy books can be shown to be demonstrably wrong, is actually evidence against those religions being true.
Any serious atheist will change there mind if presented with enough credible evidence. But the it wouldn't be religious faith any more, it would be science.
The atheist society of Australia for example defines atheism as:

Atheism is the acceptance that there is no credible scientific or factually reliable evidence for the existence of a god, gods or the supernatural.

Atheists generally see "agnostics" as those who (more or less) put similar weight on their being a god(s) and not being one, rather than actually weighing up the (lack of) evidence and coming to the obvious conclusion.

Same with this girl and her voodoo rubbish. No modern educated person of sound mind would call themselves a "voodoo agnostic", you are an "voodooist atheist" or "a-voodooist"

[MK14]

But if someone is "agnostic", then one can jump in and say that even that needs faith. Because the assumptions/calculations/beliefs/thoughts which lead one to be "agnostic", may be as much faith, as it is scientific.

But in all fairness, if you have to choose between atheist, agnostic and believing in one or more of the religions. The agnostic choice may be the most, scientific one. But I guess that is debatable.

You bet it's debatable, because you'll have a hard time finding any serious atheist who 100% believes there is no god. The atheist position is simply that there is zero credible evidence for any of the thousands of gods. And more to that, the fact that so many contradict one another and also themselves, and the fact that their holy books can be shown to be demonstrably wrong, is actually evidence against those religions being true.
Any serious atheist will change there mind if presented with enough credible evidence. But the it wouldn't be religious faith any more, it would be science.
The atheist society of Australia for example defines atheism as:

Atheism is the acceptance that there is no credible scientific or factually reliable evidence for the existence of a god, gods or the supernatural.

Atheists generally see "agnostics" as those who (more or less) put similar weight on their being a god(s) and not being one, rather than actually weighing up the (lack of) evidence and coming to the obvious conclusion.

Same with this girl and her voodoo rubbish. No modern educated person of sound mind would call themselves a "voodoo agnostic", you are an "voodooist atheist" or "a-voodooist"

Some very good points, there. Just to add to them. You also have varying degrees of religious "believers". From talking to a number of them, some of them (maybe even many), especially the moderately religious ones, don't necessarily believe that strongly in there being, a super being, master creator.

If there is a master creator, somewhere. What I can't understand, is why they don't reveal themselves (bigtime), or just keep permanently quiet about their existence. I can't see much/any point in revealing it in this weak/wishywashy way, thousands of years ago.
Also there should have only been ONE religion. The fact that there are hundreds or thousands, as you say, either means that there is no master creator (or it had nothing to do with a master creator), also that the other 99.9% of religions were created in error by humans.

I can't see why a master creator, would want hundreds of millions of followers, to read prayers, multiple times per day (depending on exact religion). What on earth is the point of that ?
Not all religions involve the prayers. But many do, hence why I made the comment.

As much as we have freedom of speech. It still would NOT be a good idea, to stand on a pedestal, and shout out that there is no master creator and all religions are wrong. All day long. Although you wont be burnt at the stake for heresy, it can still be problematic.

The dilemma I have got, is that some aspects of religion, may be beneficial (highly contentious). E.g. Christians being nice, friendly and useful citizens, who DON'T commit crimes, etc. (ten commandments).
I.e. A sort of focal meeting point, and useful/friendly organisation.

Because most religions were created, thousands of years ago. It is entirely possible, that they were created by people, who were mistaken (since science was in its infancy or did not exist), and/or the so called "miracles", could just have been magic tricks (like we get today). There is also the danger that the creators of the religion, may have just done it, to gain attention, power, wealth, resources, and other stuff.

Or it could all be true ......

[Cerebus]

Atheists generally see "agnostics" as those who (more or less) put similar weight on their being a god(s) and not being one, rather than actually weighing up the (lack of) evidence and coming to the obvious conclusion.

No, mate. You atheists have taken a religious position that "there is no god" whereas us agnostics have just reached the point of intellectual honesty where we are forced to say "dunno, can't know".

Na, I'm just yanking your chain. It's actually a linguistic shift where most people now use the word 'atheist' to describe a position that was once described with the word 'agnostic'. Strictly, or at least traditionally, 'agnostic' is almost certainly the proper term for someone who says "There is, most probably, no god." and atheist the term for someone who leaves out the qualification. It's just part of the trend towards the death of precision in everyday English - like 'literally' as metaphor replacing 'almost literally' as metaphor.

However, there is a class of people for whom atheism has reached the status of a religion, where the non-existence of god is an article of faith. I get the feeling that Richard Dawkins is one and certainly many of the people I've known who would align themselves with the Skeptic movement (as opposed to merely being sceptics) fit the description of atheism as a religion. That is, presented with credible evidence of a god, or the existence of magic, or some other similar phenomenon, they would continue to deny its existence. It's usually accompanied by an attitude of derision, sometime sneering derision, towards people who do hold beliefs that are, in the strict sense, not rationally provable. I dislike it because it shows a lack of respect for other people and a lack of respect for any philosophy beyond naked utilitarianism and materialism. Go down that route too far and you go past Nietzsche, around Ayn Rand and end up somewhere truly morally bankrupt.

I make a point of describing myself as agnostic to differentiate myself from that kind of atheist and as a reminder to myself that it is important to keep an open mind and to constantly challenge my own prejudices and assumptions. It could be mere linguistic pedantry, but I prefer to believe that I'm making a valuable point. (People who know me well are probably going to hurl rotten fruit at this point crying "No, you're just a pedant you old curmudgeon".)

[I'm not saying that my cat is greedy, but during the time I've been editing this post, which hasn't taken that long, she has made me get up (the claws to the knee technique) to feed her, not once, not twice, but three times.]

P.S. The cat is back, again!

[Cerebus]

Because most religions were created, thousands of years ago. It is entirely possible, that they were created by people, who were mistaken (since science was in its infancy or did not exist), and/or the so called "miracles", could just have been magic tricks (like we get today).

I have friend/acquaintance, Ron Hutton, who's a professor of history. He's specialises in the history of religion. Listening to him it's quite evident that in pre-enlightenment history that religion and magic were as much fact to the people living then as science is to you and me. Not merely that people 'believed' in them in the way we see some people 'believe' in religion today but believed in as solidly as we believe in gravity. It is difficult for the modern mind to get a grasp on thinking in that way.

There is also the danger that the creators of the religion, may have just done it, to gain attention, power, wealth, resources, and other stuff.

Given the mind set just mentioned I don't think that the first creators of religion(s) acted like that. Solar and lunar deities are obvious attempts to just explain how the world works*, just as we use science today. There is, however, ample evidence that later religious figures cynically manipulated people for their own ends from a whole stream of Popes right up to modern day televangelists.

*I have another friend, Des Mogg, who wrote her PhD thesis on "The cult of Mythras and Sol-Invictus" which was the Roman remains of an earlier solar deity religion. Hearing from her the canons of that cult, which predates Christianity, the central story has all the elements of the central myths of Christianity including sacrificial death and resurrection for the central character and spiritual 'rebirth' for the believers. It isn't a long stretch to see how it might have morphed over the years into what became Christianity.

[kxenos]

...some aspects of religion, may be beneficial...Christians being nice, friendly and useful citizens, who DON'T commit crimes...

Divinity and the tragedy of the existence go hand in hand from the beginning of human history. But the two big religions (christianity and islam) have set us back and continue to do so.
Islam has practically stopped the development of arab civilization and threatened to do the same to the greek and the roman ones. Christianity had a huge huge negative impact in the greek civilization and had the west civilization stop developing for 10 centuries.
But one of the basic reasons I believe that even moderate and conciliated religion, as christianity is these days, is harmful, is that religion postpones the responsibility of existence after death. This has profound consequences in the way people think and live their lives.
An other reason is that in their purest form, a christian or a muslim obey the law of their respective god, not the law of man. In this meaning, a religious person is not a citizen of the society but a sheep in the herd of god. If such a person doesn't commit crimes it is not because he has thought what's the right thing to do and imposed a suiting law on himself and by extension on the society he lives in, but because his god will punish him.
Also, about the statement that christians don't commit crimes, I'm not so sure. I don't have data but I think that if you compare the percentage of christians in the general population to the one of e.g. murderers in a prison, you are not going to find big differences.

[dannyf]

"However, there is a class of people for whom atheism has reached the status of a religion, where the non-existence of god is an article of faith."

Absolutely. Those atheists are no different in the religious nuts in that their believe in "no god" is as much a faith as the latter's believe in "god".

I'm an atheist. To me, I have not see proof of god, nor have I seen the proof of no god. I cannot rule out the existence of god, nor can I rule its his non existence.

The absence of evidence is not the same as evidence of the absence.

Unfortunately, it is very difficult to get one of aforementioned " atheists" nutjobs to understand that.

[Cerebus]

An other reason is that in their purest form, a christian or a muslim obey the law of their respective god, not the law of man. In this meaning, a religious person is not a citizen of the society but a sheep in the herd of god. If such a person doesn't commit crimes it is not because he has thought what's the right thing to do and imposed a suiting law on himself and by extension on the society he lives in, but because his god will punish him.

I can't speak for Islam, but for Christianity in the West most basic law, anything that's been around about a century or longer, is based on Christian morality. So for the most important parts of the law (but not all) there's no tension between obeying God and obeying the law.

Indeed, mainstream Christian doctrine is that one ought to obey the law of the land based on a reading of Romans 13:1-5 and other, mostly Pauline, new testament writings.

Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God. Therefore whoever resists the authorities resists what God has appointed,...

So from a fundamentalist, "do what it says in the bible", basis Christians have a clearly stated duty to obey the law and that would, I think, fit your "in their purest form" criterion.

[StuUK]

I see this thread has  gone way off topic again sigh!

[EEVblog]

I see this thread has  gone way off topic again sigh!

Yep, it'll never stay on topic. Now locked.