Matt Taibbi

Rank 28 of 47
|
Score 148
5/5/2024, 9:31:21 PM
X
In reply to:
JimmyC.
@jimbo055
·
13d
@mtaibbi It’s not enough to be opinionated but you also have to be stupid? That where I disagree with you.
JimmyC.
@jimbo055
·
13d
@mtaibbi Ok - why can’t someone be a social radical and contrarian and still believe that genes are used to code for proteins? Why can’t you reject NYTs and believes social convention is trite and politics self-serving and not just give up on western civilization but also modern science…
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
13d
Thank you Evans!
Evans Wroten
@Evans_Wroten
·
13d
Matt Taibbi provides a scathing rebuke of the Atlantic piece in defense of his friend and colleague Walter Kirn. (https://www.racket.news/p/the-at…)
As with most of Taibbi's work.....its pure gold. No doubt, from what I've seen of Walters personality & general indifference in being part…

The statement '@jimbo055 Since when was Walter stupid or anti-science?' is part of a larger conversation about a critique of a journalistic piece. It addresses the portrayal of an individual's stance on science and intellect, which is a public issue related to media representation and public perception of intellectuals. Therefore, it constitutes public discourse.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement aims to correct a perceived misrepresentation, thus aligning with the principle of doing no harm with words. It defends Walter's intellectual stance, indirectly promoting a more accurate understanding. [+1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement respects the dignity of Walter by defending his intellectual reputation, aligning with the principle of respecting the privacy and dignity of others. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    By questioning the portrayal of Walter as 'stupid or anti-science,' the statement promotes a more nuanced understanding of his views, aligning with the principle of using words to promote understanding and compassion. [+1]
  4. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in a form of constructive criticism by questioning the basis of the critique against Walter. It does not engage in personal attacks but focuses on the issue at hand, aligning with the principle of engaging constructively with those in disagreement. [+1]