site banner
PaperclipPerfector  6mo ago (text post)   27721 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of May 13, 2024

This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.

Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.

We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:

  • Shaming.

  • Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.

  • Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.

  • Recruiting for a cause.

  • Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.

In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:

  • Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.

  • Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.

  • Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.

  • Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.

On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.

5
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

An exercise to the reader: 65% of men in Britain walk more the 3 miles a day, but only 40% of men in Ethiopia do the same. The top 20% of Ethiopian walkers walk on average 20 miles a day (and over grueling terrain), whereas the top 20% of walkers in Britain average only 4 miles (over sidewalks). Which population is more likely to be negatively affected from the problems of long walks? Clearly you are very smart, or at least you wish to indicate that, so I do not need to explain further. Whether the above distinction also applies to Japan versus Israel is an empirical question which you lack the intellectual humility to even consider, whereas my take is “let’s try to find the data”.

Intellectual humility is not code for "I'm going to maintain my preconceived notions prior." Your take is not to find the data, it's to dismiss the data presented that directly contradicts your implication that Israeli fertility vs Japan is due to women in Israel working more part time.

In fact, your claim was that it's "obvious" that this is the case, which doesn't sound very intellectually humble to me, so it's a little strange that you are turning around and using that cudgel against me when it turns out that it's not so obvious after all.

If we are trying to see how work culture affects Israel versus Japan we have to look at more than one narrow factor. “Part time” is one example of a larger “occupational breakdown” which I specifically mentioned —

  1. labor force participation: Japan’s is 74% it seems, Israel’s is at 59% for women. This 15% difference is enormous

  2. We have to add potentially 22 hours at the end of the month to Japanese overtime work https://www.nippon.com/en/japan-data/h01577/#::text=Japanese%20worked%20on%20average%2022.2,overtime%20on%20average%20per%20month.

  3. The average Israeli part time worker works 22 hours, but it appears they the average Japanese part time worker (<40) works more than that just inferencing from graph break down

  4. I can’t find an actual apple’s to apple’s “average hours worked”; israel’s tells me among full time workers it’s 43hrs, Japan just tells me the top ~38% work at least 40

I have no idea why you hate complexity

labor force participation: Japan’s is 74% it seems, Israel’s is at 59% for women. This 15% difference is enormous

If we're talking about childbearing you have to look at the prime age LFPR.

Israel at 81%: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LRAC25FEILA156S

Japan at 83%: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/LRAC25FEJPM156S

Not such an enormous difference after all.

We have to add potentially 22 hours at the end of the month to Japanese overtime work

Any reason to believe this isn't factored into reported hours worked?

I don't hate complexity, I just don't like it when people couch arguments in "obvious" facts and then migrate to other facts when those obvious things turn out to be not so obvious. If it's about the vibes, just make the straightforward vibes argument and be done with it.

What is this place?

This website is a place for people who want to move past shady thinking and test their ideas in a court of people who don't all share the same biases. Our goal is to optimize for light, not heat; this is a group effort, and all commentators are asked to do their part.

The weekly Culture War threads host the most controversial topics and are the most visible aspect of The Motte. However, many other topics are appropriate here. We encourage people to post anything related to science, politics, or philosophy; if in doubt, post!

Check out The Vault for an archive of old quality posts. You are encouraged to crosspost these elsewhere.


Why are you called The Motte?

A motte is a stone keep on a raised earthwork common in early medieval fortifications. More pertinently, it's an element in a rhetorical move called a "Motte-and-Bailey", originally identified by philosopher Nicholas Shackel. It describes the tendency in discourse for people to move from a controversial but high value claim to a defensible but less exciting one upon any resistance to the former. He likens this to the medieval fortification, where a desirable land (the bailey) is abandoned when in danger for the more easily defended motte. In Shackel's words, "The Motte represents the defensible but undesired propositions to which one retreats when hard pressed."

On The Motte, always attempt to remain inside your defensible territory, even if you are not being pressed.


New post guidelines

If you're posting something that isn't related to the culture war, we encourage you to post a thread for it. A submission statement is highly appreciated, but isn't necessary for text posts or links to largely-text posts such as blogs or news articles; if we're unsure of the value of your post, we might remove it until you add a submission statement. A submission statement is required for non-text sources (videos, podcasts, images).

Culture war posts go in the culture war thread; all links must either include a submission statement or significant commentary. Bare links without those will be removed.

If in doubt, please post it!


Rules


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats