> Do you have any examples of specific ideas that are actually strange and shouted-down?
The OP said 'ignored'. Here's one idea that gets ignored or dismissed without thought:
Fiction, apart from make-believe, is a net negative for society.
It's not classic either because we're supposed to be in an enlightened era and more advanced than our primitive ancestors yet it seems people, now more than ever, look to fiction for answers (and often it's not even shared at the group level). Ironically, probably the same people who dismiss religious texts as fiction are its biggest fans.
This is a very interesting point. I've noticed that the idea that fiction is omni-present is normie-approved (books like Sapiens being bestsellers, anxiety about the media narratives, etc.) but fiction as a whole being bad is not something I hear often.
If you don't mind me asking, what is the distinction you are making between fiction and make-believe?
The first question that comes to mind is how we can live without fiction, because it seems even ignoring religion, commercial fiction or other "obvious" ideologies we still have quite a few stories about our lives to justify living them. A life without fiction would sound like it would run on some sort of incredible willpower independent of any goal.
> ... but fiction as a whole being bad is not something I hear often.
(Well I said it's a net negative, because there might be things I have overlooked.) Even when you look for 'anti-fiction', you'll just get more fiction.
> If you don't mind me asking, what is the distinction you are making between fiction and make-believe?
'make-believe' is probably not the best label, maybe 'internal fiction' is better, but I mean the processes of imagination that you go through personally and engage with verbally, that are not grounded in truth yet are probably an unavoidable part of creativity. Something akin to thought experiments. What matters is that you are doing the creative effort. (I guess novels are not so bad because the reader still has to do something.)
> ... we still have quite a few stories about our lives to justify living them. A life without fiction would sound like it would run on some sort of incredible willpower independent of any goal.
You seem to be referring to what I referred to as make-believe. As far as external fiction goes, why do we have to put layers and layers of arbitrary meanings and labels on top of direct experience? Why do we have to add sugar to everything? Can you find one documentary without background music added to tell you how to feel? Does everything have to come prepackaged? Where is the place of raw unprocessed reality? Boredom is not a bottomless pit. Our bodies come preprogrammed with goals. We do not need to justify curiosity or our will to live, so we can strip everything back without becoming nihilistic, as we are not passive receivers.
Anyway, back to the original subject: there are people who refuse to even consider such arguments. I think you know what they call me, and I think you know what I call them.
The OP said 'ignored'. Here's one idea that gets ignored or dismissed without thought:
Fiction, apart from make-believe, is a net negative for society.
It's not classic either because we're supposed to be in an enlightened era and more advanced than our primitive ancestors yet it seems people, now more than ever, look to fiction for answers (and often it's not even shared at the group level). Ironically, probably the same people who dismiss religious texts as fiction are its biggest fans.