Gurwinder says… “Truth is found in the debris of collided narratives.
That’s why its essential to seek out the views of your opponents”.
Yes. In the social sciences truth often emerges gradually and unevenly over time from the rough contact of opposition.
Passion and certainty usually sit on false assumptions and false morality.
And it’s why we need Voltaire’s attitude of, “I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it” – limited by our traditions of proscribing harassment, fraud, slander, libel, defamation, incitement, of demanding mutual respect in the workplace, and of respecting the partial truth of the risk of ‘epistemic violence’ that perpetuates dominant power narratives at the expense of the more vulnerable.
It’s a mix, which won’t get me a lot of likes from the partisan politics of either side, but is how a lot of progress occurs in the end while pendulums swing around.
However without free speech (with its limits as above), the pendulum will inevitably stop at a totalitarian extreme.
So defend free speech and do as Gurwinder suggests even though it’s effortful and painful.