Rationally Speaking #152 - Dan Fincke on "The pros and cons of civil disagreement"

Julia invites philosopher and blogger Dan Fincke onto the show, inspired by a productive disagreement they had on Facebook. Their topic in this episode: civility in public discourse. Do atheists and skeptics have a responsibility to be civil when expressing disagreement, and does that responsibility vary depending on who their target is? Is there a legitimate role for offensive satire? And might there be downsides to civility? Dan and Julia also revisit the subject of their original disagreement: the recent NECSS decision to rescind Richard Dawkins' speaking invitation, on account of a video he tweeted which compared feminists to Islamists. Dan and Julia attempt to put the Dawkins case study in the broader context of the civility debate, asking questions like: What makes something offensive, and can someone be *unjustifiably* offended? Sped up the speakers by ['1.06', '1.0']

You can listen to Rationally Speaking #152 - Dan Fincke on "The pros and cons of civil disagreement" online on Radio and Podcast. Open the player on this page to stream the available audio.

Rationally Speaking #152 - Dan Fincke on "The pros and cons of civil disagreement" is an episode from Sped up Rationally Speaking by rs_speedup.

This episode is 00:52:21 long.

This episode was published on Jan 3, 2021.

Yes. Use the heart button on the episode page to add it to your favorite episodes list.

Yes. This page shows related episodes from Sped up Rationally Speaking when more episodes are available from the podcast feed.