Re:Why Google’s firing terrifies social conservatives so much
by LyndsySimon on Tuesday August 08, 2017 @08:08PM
(#14964281)
> toxic conclusions
How can a conclusion be "toxic"? A conclusion is either consistent or inconsistent with the evidence at hand.
Re:Why Google’s firing terrifies social conservatives so much
by Yetanfou on Wednesday August 09, 2017 @04:36AM
(#14966621)
A conclusion is "toxic" when it poisons the desired outcome and/or goes counter to the narrative. Evidence does not play a major part in this, other than to be quoted when it supports the narrative or dismissed or smeared when it doesn't (viz. Obscurantism [1] and Moral relativism [2])
Correct. It's worse: they are irrelevant. It buried the lede of unsubstantiated and toxic conclusions under some marginally related statistics and science. As a whole it wasn't a scientifically sound argument by any metric.
> The people creating a toxic work environment are those[..]
The people determining whether a working environment is toxic for them is the majority of people working in that environment. Whether you feel it shouldn't be considered toxic is a different matter.
> Firing someone for political beliefs is not grounds for termination, and never has been.
Anti-social behaviour, whether based on religion, political beliefs, or plainly being a jerk, is always a good reason for termination in larger companies. It's what keeps a work force together.
P.S. "subpar people"? Maybe you meant to say "Untermenschen"?