29 min listen
Rationally Speaking #152 - Dan Fincke on "The pros and cons of civil disagreement"
Rationally Speaking #152 - Dan Fincke on "The pros and cons of civil disagreement"
ratings:
Length:
54 minutes
Released:
Feb 7, 2016
Format:
Podcast episode
Description
Julia invites philosopher and blogger Dan Fincke onto the show, inspired by a productive disagreement they had on Facebook. Their topic in this episode: civility in public discourse. Do atheists and skeptics have a responsibility to be civil when expressing disagreement, and does that responsibility vary depending on who their target is? Is there a legitimate role for offensive satire? And might there be downsides to civility?
Dan and Julia also revisit the subject of their original disagreement: the recent NECSS decision to rescind Richard Dawkins' speaking invitation, on account of a video he tweeted which compared feminists to Islamists. Dan and Julia attempt to put the Dawkins case study in the broader context of the civility debate, asking questions like: What makes something offensive, and can someone be *unjustifiably* offended?
Dan and Julia also revisit the subject of their original disagreement: the recent NECSS decision to rescind Richard Dawkins' speaking invitation, on account of a video he tweeted which compared feminists to Islamists. Dan and Julia attempt to put the Dawkins case study in the broader context of the civility debate, asking questions like: What makes something offensive, and can someone be *unjustifiably* offended?
Released:
Feb 7, 2016
Format:
Podcast episode
Titles in the series (100)
Rationally Speaking #3 - Can History Be a Science?: Guest: Prof. Peter Turchin of the U. of Conn. discusses whether history can be studied and understood in a scientific manner. Plus our guest's pick: Victor Lieberman's book "Strange Parallels" by Rationally Speaking Podcast