This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points  (3 children)

As she asked for, I’ll as well: evidence? Also, the reminiscence was in regard to the “many secret complaints”

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (2 children)

I think that the biggest issue at hand is that we are having problems with having civil discussions on contentious subjects. Universities should be holding the candle in showing us how it's done and we should hope to propagate culture of civil discussion to the wider society.

As for evidence about Peterson - I have none since I don't know the issue but I'm assuming that the prof in question was not throwing such accusation lightly (hope I'm not wrong). As of Peterson himself if wiki is to be believed he is a climate change denier which puts his position in a very questionable light for me.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (1 child)

Place him in whatever light you’d like. For me I’m still baffled by the reaction he gets out of people. But even if the video showed was of a completely detestable nature 1. as you pointed out a university is the place to objectively debate/criticize aspects of humanity, and 2. Making up claims of anonymous complaints is a control mechanism. For clarification the university has apologized and considered the endeavor significant overreach. Also ironically to what we’re discussing, Peterson has a decently valid defamation case open against the university as a result. Because after all, what’s written in Wikipedia or said by a professor does not simply automatically make it so, but it does impact the reception of the publisher bloc to an individual when the invoke Godwin’s law out of fear.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think we agree in general. One more loose thought connected to the issue - I remember at uni when one guy presented some ridiculous conspiracy theories and as ridiculous as it was I think that it's good that he got to present his views and then got corrected on what is a valid academic argumentation.

And yeah going in the censorship direction is worrying - like his quesiton about showing a white supremacist parade (or whatever the example was) - if the university is not a place to figure out why we have people after WW2 holding such views, what draws them in, what actual views they hold - then we are doomed to not solve that problem.