Re: [PATCH] CODE_OF_CONDUCT: expect tolerance, not respect

From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
To: "Michal Suchánek" <msuchanek@suse.de>,
	"Felipe Contreras" <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>
Cc: "Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason" <avarab@gmail.com>,
	git@vger.kernel.org, git@sfconservancy.org,
	"Christian Couder" <christian.couder@gmail.com>,
	"Jeff King" <peff@peff.net>,
	"'Junio C Hamano '" <gitster@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] CODE_OF_CONDUCT: expect tolerance, not respect
Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 11:06:26 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <5fe8bf127e45b_e22d2080@natae.notmuch> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201227150737.GM6564@kitsune.suse.cz>

Michal Suchánek wrote:
> > We would need to see which interpretation you are talking about.
> > 
> > One example to show the difference is that you are supposed to hold in
> > high regard (respect) your parents, or the King, whereas in a Thanksgiving dinner
> > you are supposed to endure (tolerate) your uncle talking about conspiracy
> > theories.
> > 
> > These are of course culturally-specific examples. But I hope you get the
> > point.
> 
> This is rather sensitive issue. I think there are other two things that
> are often conflated: respect for views and opinions and respect for
> people.

Right, but the code of conduct talks about respecting views.

> It is certainly true that respecting people cannot be enforced as much
> as respecting opinions cannot be. However, it is shown that not behaving
> respectfully to people stifles constructive discussion (eg. speech
> against ad-hominem arguments).

Indeed, but I don't think that has anything to do with freedom of
speech... it's not constructive discussion because the main point is not
being addressed. See Paul Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement [1].

> On the other hand, showing respect to useless views or ideas stifles
> constructive discussion as well. Useless ideas should be pointed out as
> such and discarded.

Yes, not all ideas should be tolerated in all forums.

> The reason why respect to ideas is often part of code of conduct is
> likely religion. There are precious few people who hold religious
> beliefs and at the same time encourage scrutiny of religion.

Not just religion, but any dogmatic belief.

When you express you don't believe in an idea that somebody holds very
dear, people take that as a personal attack, even though they shouldn't.

What's more; when you provide arguments against such an idea, and
they are actually good arguments, that creates cognitive dissonance,
which is unconfortable to the person holding the idea.

But that's what being part of an open society entails; your ideas are
going to be challenged. That's actually a good thing.

Ideas should not be protected.

Cheers.

[1] https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7c/Graham%27s_Hierarchy_of_Disagreement.svg

-- 
Felipe Contreras