Hacker News Reader

What you're talking about is nuance, and there's unfortunately little-to-no room for it in modern discourse largely because of opinions like yours which could be summed up as "if this person doesn't robotically toe the line, then the dumbs will believe things we don't want them believing."

Strategic lying is employed for the "greater good" in the context of this way of thinking frequently, the most egregious example probably being Fauci telling the public not to wear masks because privately the government believed that there wouldn’t be enough protective equipment for health care workers -- they didn't want the dumbs to panic-buy and leave hospitals vulnerable.

Not looking to get into a covid debate, just pointing out that even governments will lie to keep the dumbs from doing something they don't like, and I think that's bad.

It’s basically like treating adults as if they are children. Something that all these public health “experts” did to people for 2.5 years. They talked down to people. Acted like they knew what was best for everybody (which they didn’t).

You don’t get to treat adults like children. They are adults who might know something you don’t.

It’s just toxic discourse.

Unfortunately a lot of adults act like children. It's debatable if acting like children is the cause or the reason for treating them that way.

> Unfortunately a lot of adults act like children.

True, but it could also be their priorities are somewhere other than yours. Which might be okay or might not depending on whatever.

What these "experts" and politicians did though... treat people like dumb children... completely inexcusable.

If we were able to get to the source of the 'trust science' clique, I bet we would be amazed at how uninteresting it all is. grievances about hurt feelings, mental health issues and moral panic.

It’s appeals to authority all the way down. Actual science or data (or even actual disease mitigation) had almost nothing to do with the actions “the experts” took over the last 2.5 years.

> there's a very real pipeline in which people with less-trained critical thinking skills

If this is your opinion, perhaps the problem is that society undervalues critical thinking skills. Not that an entertainer isn’t shilling in the correct directions.

    If the intellect and judgment of mankind ought to be cultivated, a thing
    which Protestants at least do not deny, on what can these faculties be
    more appropriately exercised by any one, than on the things which
    concern him so much that it is considered necessary for him to hold
    opinions on them?

    - John Stuart Mill, On Liberty (1859)

Perhaps the cause of this problem is refusing society the opportunity to exercise their critical thinking skills.

No matter, we can just spoonfeed everyone the received and accepted wisdom. Then there will be no need for any faculties of discernment.

    The Catholic Church has its own way of dealing with this
    embarrassing problem. It makes a broad separation between those who can
    be permitted to receive its doctrines on conviction, and those who must
    accept them on trust.

Unoriginal.