My Hypothesis-rebelpilot64
Why banning books is bad.
Why we should not ban books from school libraries.
Why Banning books is unfair to others.
What are the negative effects on banning books?
Why banning books prevent kids from learning.
Banning books can prevent kids from seeing the world in a different perspective.
Edited version
Banning books can prevent kids from seeing in the world in a different perspective.
If books get ban in schools, then kids will be sheltered away from the world.
Books can get ban for the most ridiculous reasons just because the character in the story is a bit of a rebel or trouble maker.
Parents want to ban books in schools to prevent their kids from seeing bad stuff, but they might ruin it for other kids because now they can’t get the book.
Books get banned all the time but yet people teach their kids the bible even though some of the bible stories are very dark themselves and some bible stories are darker than some of the books getting banned.
Counterintuitive Fall 2024 
This is a fine topic, RebelPilot. I hope we can work together to develop it into a first-class Hypothesis because I’d love to see a good essay about book-banning.
“Why” can never be the first word in a Hypothesis since a “why” sentence does not make a claim that can be argued.
You get close to an arguable claim when you focus on school libraries and on the effect of banning books on kids in particular. So, let’s start there and ignore the five steps that got us here.
Your Hypothesis proves itself and requires no argument at all if we take it at face value. If kids have access to books ONLY through their school libraries, and if the school bans EVEN ONE BOOK from the shelves, then banning that book BY DEFINITION prevents at least some kids from viewing the world from the PARTICULAR DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE OF THAT AUTHOR’S BOOK.
Surely you mean more than that.
What if your Hypothesis BEGAN with the broad claim:
1. Banning books from school libraries limits the number of perspectives the school presents as “approved.”
That’s different, isn’t it? It sets up a dynamic between the school, the students, and the students’ parents to decide which voices have a right to be heard and which must be suppressed.
What’s the result of children not finding voices that resonate with their own feelings and their sense of self?
On what basis are books being banned in today’s political climate? Are they yanked from libraries because they’re “age-inappropriate” or because they discuss social situations someone determines to be “never” appropriate?
Drop me another Feedback Please when you’ve made some revisions here, RP. I’m eager to see where it will go.
I fixed it up now.
I appreciate the work you’ve done, RebelPilot, and I think with rephrasing we can agree on a Hypothesis that actually makes a PROVABLE CLAIM.
You say:
You’ve pointed out an important contradiction that could also be phrased to expose the intentional or unintended hypocrisy of book banners. But you haven’t actually made a CLAIM except to say that there are apparent inconsistencies in the decision to ban certain books whose subject matter overlaps with the contents of the Bible.
Your #6 statement flirts with a MANDATE. It might look like this:
BOOK BANNERS SHOULD HAVE TO CHOOSE. They can either ban the Bible, which contains all the subject matter they cite as reasons to ban non-religious books, OR they can ban the Bible along with all those other books they’ve taken from the shelves.
What would that Hypothesis look like?
How does that sound?