Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Surely there's room for people to vehemently disagree without being called fragile and "unable to take it".


He said that they are literally leaving because people couldn't take arguments against life extension.

I think life extension is great, but I think leaving because people disagree with that is close to the definition of "unable to take it".


Arguments against? Or the social consequences of being on the "wrong" side of a controversial argument?

I'd assert the latter...


I’m not sure that matters? Or rather, the specifics of the controversial argument matter a lot.

If someone is unable to find people who agree that helping people live longer then perhaps there is something else going on, because that doesn’t seem a hard argument to make.

OTOH, if they are making the argument that Hitler was correct, then yes I would unashamedly hope there are social consequences.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: