>>85281695imo this argument got all screwed up by people demanding "scientific" evidence rather than just any evidence. he's challenging people to defend their position in good faith using an argument other than tradition, but to our ears today it sounds like he wants studies and numbers which we know are just as untrustworthy and damaging to the discussion as no evidence half the time. in other words, his point was diluted by dumber dogmatic people repeating in a stupid way, and this has sort of infected every secular subject and made them all cliquey and unhinged.
