Let me turn that onto yourself. Why do you believe that you are right? And why do you think you (or whoever) gets to decide what is correct or not for the remaining millions? No one is forcing anyone to anything (after all only who wants tunes in to JRE) although I think it is very healthy to have an enquiring mind and to have the habit of questioning and judging everything of importance you come by.
Hence my question 2. If you can answer that honestly, and in good faith, at least my personal answer to this follows, and hopefully, eventually, why Rogan's approach is fundamentally invalid; why just asking questions is deceptive.
But even if your perspective differs - I don't expect everyone to follow my lead, of couse - I don't think you're going to understand my reasoning without at least trying to understand and answer that question. In essence - your assertion that it's (implicitly unconditionally) "very healthy to have an enquiring mind" is backed by an assumption I do not share. I know that there are conditions here, and Rogan isn't satisfying those. And the heart of that disagreement is behind question 2.
So if we censor information and don't let people like Joe Rogan ask questions then the human species will be a better species instead of some kind of an ecological disaster?
Also, you don't think that having an enquiring mind is good? How do you justify that? And what is the assumption I made that you don't share?
