DiscoverSped up Rationally SpeakingRationally 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"

Rationally Speaking #152 - Dan Fincke on "The pros and cons of civil disagreement"

Update: 2021-01-03
Share

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?


 Sped up the speakers by ['1.06', '1.0']

Comments 
loading
In Channel
loading
00:00
00:00
1.0x

0.5x

0.8x

1.0x

1.25x

1.5x

2.0x

3.0x

Sleep Timer

Off

End of Episode

5 Minutes

10 Minutes

15 Minutes

30 Minutes

45 Minutes

60 Minutes

120 Minutes

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"

rs_speedup