It would be a means of controlling who is allowed to “do” science and the ability to determine what can be communicated to the public.
Read More ›
There’s a moral to this story: If we are departing for a kinder, gentler social medium, we will not get our wish if we pack the hate with us.
Read More ›
If you don’t want conflict or controversy, don’t pretend you want to be where the news is. And don’t be surprised if your platform mostly appeals to conventional people who all agree with each other.
Read More ›
On Saturday, I looked at Matt Johnson’s thoughts on George Orwell’s vital but comparatively unknown 1946 essay, “The Prevention of Literature.” Orwell, famous for Animal Farm (1945) and Nineteen Eighty-Four (1949), wanted to “make political writing into an art.” He was well aware that most competitors for public attention simply wanted to make political writing a reliable form of mass brainwashing. He hoped to find a public that sought an alternative. He published “Prevention” (longish, at 5500 words) in Polemic, a short-lived British intellectual magazine (1945–47), which featured work by such notables as Henry Miller, Bertrand Russell, A. J. Ayer, and Dylan Thomas. Intellectual freedom as “violence” Intellectual freedom, as we have always been told, is only ever one generation Read More ›
Automated writing leads to a decline in intellectual skills for the same reasons as automated walking would lead to a decline in motor skills.
Read More ›
Carole Hooven discovered that, where the sex binary nature of humans is concerned, the new elite at Harvard and The Lancet thrive on nonsense. But she can’t.
Read More ›
Google says it was largely at the government’s behest. The Biden administration apparently believed in censorship far more than many Americans realized.
Read More ›
Here at Mind Matters News, we thought there might be fallout. And 1.15M views in less than a week seems like fallout already. Something’s rotten.
Read More ›
Many people experience a vast liberation when they are freed from the constraints of logic, reason and evidence. They won’t part lightly with their new freedom.
Read More ›
Nothing great is at stake in what happened to Kimmel. In the domination of science by ideology, by the myth of “settled science,” the stakes couldn’t be more profound.
Read More ›
Shows like Kimmel’s and Colbert’s have long abandoned the usual attempts at humor, which has historically included taking jabs at both sides of the aisle.
Read More ›
DoD Chief Strategy Officer Jinyoung Englund will be speaking on what control by China would mean and whether the United States can catch up.
Read More ›
It seems unlikely that the only reason that the Munich Center parted ways with Hossenfelder is bad language in her posts. Is she uncomfortably correct?
Read More ›
As long as access to the internet continues, it is still easy to get around most restrictions. But no one should see this fact as a healthy news environment.
Read More ›
His new book, co-authored with Nadine Strossen, offers ten arguments against free speech — and why they fail.
Read More ›
As a veteran journalist puts it, once you build a co-dependence like that, you lose public trust. People are just not going to believe you.
Read More ›
The discussion touched on many areas covered by the new book, The Immortal Mind, but one scientist’s dilemma stood out.
Read More ›
Free speech entails engaging with views one might not agree with. Why not enjoy the books (or not) and debate the ideas in the public arena?
Read More ›
The alternative to the First Amendment is a narratocracy in which a society’s commanding institutions determine what stories are allowed and disallowed.
Read More ›
After the 2016 election, Google leadership decided to prevent voters it saw as populist and low-information from deciding future presidential elections.
Read More ›