Perhaps I'm living in la-la land, but I can imagine an institution where you'd get booed off the stage by protestors screaming "Stop wasting my time; tell me something I *don't* know!" I agree, institutional culture often stifles dissenting opinions (and the human desire to not be cast out is strong), but it DOES NOT HAVE TO BE THAT WAY.
I have been thinking about my self-censorship after recently watching some presentations on censorship and self-censorship in sciences (https://dornsife.usc.edu/cesr/censorship-in-the-sciences-interdisciplinary-perspectives/). As a physical scientist, I probably have a greater focus on data than economists and other social scientists, who seem to rely more on argument, theory or history. I have generally found carefully measured data to be more persuasive than narratives. I naively think others will also find data to be persuasive. My approach to presentations and writing is to highlight and explain the data, not my opinion. No sugar coating. Whether an audience is on my side or not is irrelevant. Whoever they are, the important thing to me is that people see and understand relevant data. This may be why I am not invited to give presentations very often. And that is fine with me. This may help me minimize self-censorship, at least in professional settings.
I'm looking forward to the book, Glenn. This is a profound subject, IMO. For all my/our advocacy for free speech, I'm not an absolutist, and neither are you, apparently. Even Dave Chappell thinks a bit before he speaks. For me, as a Christian, that's biblical. (Be quick to listen, slow to speak...Be not rash with your mouth...) Where is the line? No clue.
The lecture might be of interest to a small group of academics but for the rest of mankind it is naval gazing on steroids. Most people intuitively understand that every system or universal 'thing' ultimately has limitations, and everything eventually breaks down. So, too is the limits of free speech. The point is made now please move on. The big issue is the money laundering schemes, that are made possible by the Uktraine war. Or, what exactly is the and ostensible connection beween Africans from Africa, and African Americans. What is it?
Perhaps I'm living in la-la land, but I can imagine an institution where you'd get booed off the stage by protestors screaming "Stop wasting my time; tell me something I *don't* know!" I agree, institutional culture often stifles dissenting opinions (and the human desire to not be cast out is strong), but it DOES NOT HAVE TO BE THAT WAY.
Free speech doesn’t mean speech free from consequences only free from government restrictions and punishment.
I have been thinking about my self-censorship after recently watching some presentations on censorship and self-censorship in sciences (https://dornsife.usc.edu/cesr/censorship-in-the-sciences-interdisciplinary-perspectives/). As a physical scientist, I probably have a greater focus on data than economists and other social scientists, who seem to rely more on argument, theory or history. I have generally found carefully measured data to be more persuasive than narratives. I naively think others will also find data to be persuasive. My approach to presentations and writing is to highlight and explain the data, not my opinion. No sugar coating. Whether an audience is on my side or not is irrelevant. Whoever they are, the important thing to me is that people see and understand relevant data. This may be why I am not invited to give presentations very often. And that is fine with me. This may help me minimize self-censorship, at least in professional settings.
Does Thomas Sowell self censor? I don't think he does.
The few comments here -- from "profound" to "naval gazing" indicate a diversity that makes me smile. Ha! Let those who have ears...
Thought provoking
I'm looking forward to the book, Glenn. This is a profound subject, IMO. For all my/our advocacy for free speech, I'm not an absolutist, and neither are you, apparently. Even Dave Chappell thinks a bit before he speaks. For me, as a Christian, that's biblical. (Be quick to listen, slow to speak...Be not rash with your mouth...) Where is the line? No clue.
Sounds like a cop-out. I am unable to hear outside of “us”? How sadly narrow I must be.
The lecture might be of interest to a small group of academics but for the rest of mankind it is naval gazing on steroids. Most people intuitively understand that every system or universal 'thing' ultimately has limitations, and everything eventually breaks down. So, too is the limits of free speech. The point is made now please move on. The big issue is the money laundering schemes, that are made possible by the Uktraine war. Or, what exactly is the and ostensible connection beween Africans from Africa, and African Americans. What is it?
The book is coming out in July. It's going to be discussed a lot more in the coming months, so prepare yourself.
I don't think it's Cuba that you mean here...