I think the status risk is real, but also a bit overblown
This post is about trying to figure out and/or explain recent trends in epistemic conditions, for which it’s not the real status risk that matters, but the perceived risk. So this response doesn’t seem directly relevant. (Talking about something tangential here is fine with me, but I just want to make that clear.) ETA: On second thought I guess this could be part of the explanation for why people have high perceived risk so it is relevant after all. :)
If needed, you can make money outside it, have a social circle, and lead an interesting life.
Can you explain more about this? For example if you’re a professor and you get canceled, what are you supposed to do to regain comparable income/status/perks?
This post is about trying to figure out and/or explain recent trends in epistemic conditions, for which it’s not the real status risk that matters, but the perceived risk. So this response doesn’t seem directly relevant. (Talking about something tangential here is fine with me, but I just want to make that clear.) ETA: On second thought I guess this could be part of the explanation for why people have high perceived risk so it is relevant after all. :)
Can you explain more about this? For example if you’re a professor and you get canceled, what are you supposed to do to regain comparable income/status/perks?
For income, maybe try to get a job in industry. For status, if nobody spoke up against the canceling, I’m not sure such status is worth regaining.