I read an interesting article the other day about the growing conflict between what the writer called the “mythological” and the “technological”.
This was not a politically biased article, it had a different bent, interested in exploring the conflict between political ideologies on college campuses.
The point being made was that the discordance between the “sides” is due to the fact that one side is “mythological” and the other is “technological”. The “mythological” side accepts as truth, without evidence because none should be required to hold a belief which is (on the surface) egalitarian, things like “rape culture”, “gender fluidity”, that there exists a “patriarchy”, and similar views with which you are familiar.
The are “mythological” because like all myths (stating this because in the US, “myth” is often erroneously considered a synonym for “fiction”), it is based on a modicum of truth, usually anecdotal, around which a world view is developed.
In contrast, the “technological” side prefers fact, and deal with what is provably true by data, statistics, existing law, and the like; and build their world view THAT way.
The reason that “safe spaces” are required by the mythological contingent is because their beliefs are based on the need for a desired outcome, which they are attached to emotionally, rather than based on fact. When confronted with the technological argument, they lack the ability to respond with fact, get frustrated because their appeals to emotion towards the technologist are rebuffed, which actually causes an emotional frustration that can really only be relieved by watching goldfish, kittens, and listening to spa music.
(When technological speakers like Ben Shapiro or Heather MacDonald take questions after a lecture on a campus, there is *usually* an interesting moment where the questioner tries to move their emotional attachment to the subject of disagreement to the speaker. The technologist, of course, doesn’t care a whit about the emotions, and rebuffs them, usually with amusing results.)
Further., they believe that we (the technological) hate THEM, when we of course don’t; what we hate is emotion masquerading as reason, and anecdote masquerading as fact.
I thought it an interesting way of looking at the matter.