Home / Liberty / Google’s Anti-Bullying AI Mistakes Civility for Decency – Motherboard

Google’s Anti-Bullying AI Mistakes Civility for Decency – Motherboard

The article linked to below actually argues against civil discourse. It laments that the idea of civil discourse is, to the author, simply a mask. A mask for YOUR hatred.

You see, this is how it works: at first, you get to say whatever you want, however, you want. Then they don’t like what you say, but you have the right to say it, so they say you should at least not shout about it, can we all just sit down and talk about our differences? Then you meekly comply and change the way you speak. You’re kind, don’t shout, and think really hard about how to phrase your argument. Now that’s not enough either. It’s the very ideas themselves that are the problem so you simply must not speak those ideas no matter how kindly you state them.

“If we were merely kind to one another in our interactions, the argument goes, we would be less divided. Yet, this argument fails to recognize how politeness and charm have throughout history been used to dress up hateful speech, including online.”

You see, it doesn’t matter how you say it, how civil you are, or how logical, they would rather you just not say it.

“The argument for civility is thus: If we were only civil to each other, the world would be a better place. If only we addressed each other politely, we would be able to solve our disagreements. This has led to the expectation that any speech—as long as it’s dressed up in the guise of politeness—should be accepted and debated, no matter how bigoted or harmful the idea behind the words.”

They then go on to use the Google employee and his paper on gender in the workplace as an example. He wrote an intelligent, logical, kindly worded paper, full of hate. His ideas, no matter how logically organized are not worth debating. I maintain that even bad ideas are worth discussing. How else will you know the ins and outs, the root, of such ideas? You need to so you can form in your own mind the arguments you have against them.

Most people have a built-in sense that tells them when something is wrong. You may not be able to put your finger on it, but you know it isn’t right. This protects us from immediate harm. However, that sense can be worn down with time once the immediate danger has passed. This is true of what lurks in the woods as well as what lurks in the mind.

 

Sophisticated Speech

The argument for civility is thus: If we were only civil to each other, the world would be a better place. If only we addressed each other politely, we would be able to solve our disagreements. This has led to the expectation that any speech—as long as it’s dressed up in the guise of politeness—should be accepted and debated, no matter how bigoted or harmful the idea behind the words.

Source: Google’s Anti-Bullying AI Mistakes Civility for Decency – Motherboard

Top
%d bloggers like this: