>This is directly antithetical to the very foundations of the American experiment. Religion has no place in the classroom, in the halls of ivy, in our codes of ethics, or in deciding how we express ourselves, and almost all of us spontaneously understand that and see any misunderstanding of the premise as backward. Yet since about 2015, a peculiar contingent has been slowly headlocking us into making an exception, supposing that this new religion is so incontestably good, so gorgeously surpassing millennia of brilliant philosophers’ attempts to identify the ultimate morality, that we can only bow down in humble acquiescence.
Anyone else see this article as incredibly two-faced? He's lowkey slipping in the assumption that we all want to be broadly excluding people from intuitions based on their beliefs and then complains about... people wanting to exclude him?
Anyone else see this article as incredibly two-faced? He's lowkey slipping in the assumption that we all want to be broadly excluding people from intuitions based on their beliefs and then complains about... people wanting to exclude him?