I think that we can accept that human nature exists, and we can accept that it underlies an sort of socially conservative ideas. I don't see much value at all in the e sanctity degradation one, which is when people are disgusted by homosexual sex or by a women having multiple sexual partners. Soi, i test am on this as more liberal than most liberals. But then i am on the tradition one am, which is, is christia conservative. I ii quite highly on that. It seems i i'm patriotic a liberal, which doesn't really work. And they're different from another human with a different moral intuitions. We're going to argue over these things
Have you heard that language is violence and that science is sexist? Have you read that certain people shouldn’t practice yoga or cook Chinese food? Or been told that being obese is healthy, that there is no such thing as biological sex, or that only white people can be racist? Are you confused by these ideas, and do you wonder how they have managed so quickly to challenge the very logic of Western society?
In this wide-ranging conversation Helen Pluckrose recounts the evolution of the dogma that informs these ideas, from its coarse origins in French postmodernism to its refinement within activist academic fields. Today this dogma is recognizable as much by its effects, such as cancel culture and social-media dogpiles, as by its tenets, which are all too often embraced as axiomatic in mainstream media: knowledge is a social construct; science and reason are tools of oppression; all human interactions are sites of oppressive power play; and language is dangerous.