We are having two debates at the same time, on both sides of the mind/body split:
Person A says:
“Let good and bad germs fight it out in our bodies. That’s how individuals and groups develop physical strength.”
Also: “Let good and bad ideas fight it out in our minds. That’s how individuals and groups develop psychological strength.”
Person B says:
“Do not expose anyone to bad germs. That’s how individuals and groups stay healthy.”
Also: “Do not expose anyone to bad ideas. That’s how individuals and groups stop the spread of immoral beliefs.”
While Person A will tolerate more dirt, social mixing, and open/closed experimenting, Person B will be attracted to rigorous antiseptic, self-and-other isolation, and lockdowns.
Also: Person A will urge the open marketplace of ideas and developing a thick skin in the the collision of perspectives, Person B will want only good ideas to be available and to remove too-open platforms from the marketplace.
The subjects of our current skirmishes are Covid-19 and Social Media platforms. And politics is part of the subject packages. Yet more general philosophies of life, risk, and value are at work, with the competing political solutions to Covid-19 and Social-Media conflict in particular being downstream from those general philosophies.
Can I challenge you, or are you now in the comfort zone? (note: Idea Virus, I believe Gad Saad is the source for spreading that equivalence. An interesting fellows, but in that case ;))
Waiting for your answer
Are you defending Person A’s social mixing in the midst of the pandemic? Do you really believe that there are competing political solutions to the pandemic? What competes with masking, social isolation, and getting as many people vaccinated as soon as possible?
Do you want the “too open platforms” to be left open to Qanon followers, election deniers, and white supremacists, so they can co-ordinate the overthrow of government and commit violence?
Maybe read the post again, Chris, a little more carefully this time, before responding.