What You Can’t Say
Paul Graham’s essay What You Can’t Say argues that moral taboos function like invisible fashions—arbitrary yet enforced with serious consequences.
The Conformist Test
If you never disagree with prevailing opinion, you’re probably just conforming rather than thinking independently. Graham compares this to mapmakers deliberately inserting errors: if your beliefs perfectly match society’s approved positions, that’s suspiciously coincidental.
Methods for Identifying Taboos
-
Observe reactions to troubling statements — Ideas that provoke anger rather than refutation likely contain uncomfortable truths
-
Track weaponized labels — Terms like “inappropriate,” “divisive,” or “defeatist” signal suppressed ideas worth examining
-
Compare across time and cultures — Ideas considered harmless historically or elsewhere but taboo here warrant scrutiny
-
Study the overly fastidious — Institutions known for rigidity concentrate current taboos
-
Understand taboo mechanics — Powerful but nervous groups create taboos to suppress threatening ideas
Strategic Recommendations
- Think freely privately but choose carefully what to express publicly
- Use abstraction, metaphor, and humor to challenge taboos indirectly
- Avoid pointless battles that distract from meaningful work
My Takeaway
Developing the ability to question taboos strengthens intellectual capability, prevents belief in future-ridiculous ideas, and enables genuine innovation.
What can’t you say in your field? I’d love to hear at persdre@gmail.com.