|
|
|
|
|
by MattPalmer1086
392 days ago
|
|
It is certainly intellectually dishonest to claim that the government funding anything you don't like is a violation of your "intellectual freedom". You are still free to think and say anything you like. Taken to its logical conclusion, it would mean that the government should not fund anything, ever, for any purpose, because someone might disagree with it? Isn't disagreement actually a sign of intellectual freedom? |
|
Agreed. I never claimed that of course, and neither did the authors. What they claimed is that government funding ALWAYS comes with strings attached, therefore the only way to have true intellectual freedom is to reject all funding. Moreover, the difference between government strings and private funding strings are that only government strings come under the threat of force.