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.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I'll bite the bullet and be the strawman here - yes, all else equal, people that are fit and maintain their weight are morally superior to those that don't. You can explain to me the complex biological underpinnings of why some people have a harder time doing that and I will still think they are morally inferior to people that do it. I grasp that compulsive liars and addicts may lack the same full capacity for agency as others, but I still think they're morally inferior to people that are honest and temperate. Ultimately, I judge someone's moral positioning by their actions and the traits exemplified by sloth and gluttony are poor ones.
Does this come off as smug, self-satisfied, and self-serving? I'm sure it does, but I'm not inclined to pretend people that ruin their bodies through a lack of agency aren't demonstrating a condemnable moral failing.
I guess, "all else equal," but that's a caveat that pretty much makes the generalization useless. Do you think a skinny smoker is morally superior to a fat non-smoker? Is a very fit guy who cheats on his wife morally superior to a fat guy who's a great husband?
Sure, I understand what you're saying here, and those who maintain (or lose) weight have something that makes them "better" in some sense than those who don't, but I think it's way too easy to get judgmental about such a common human failing. I reserve my scorn for those who make excuses or deny agency.
I suppose you can run those hypotheticals with any traits, but if you're thinking about whether a given trait is an indicator of morality, you pretty much have to consider it in a vacuum unless there's a clear interplay between the two. To my knowledge, fit men are not particularly prone to cheating on their wives. All else equal, men that cheat on their wives are immoral compared to men who are faithful. I'm sure that the cheaters, on average, have more opportunities and stronger sex drives - I don't care, the faithful men are still better men.
In real life, I'm unsurprisingly much less likely to have cause to be strident about the matter, it's not like I'm running up on random fat people to lecture them about their moral inferiority. As your hypotheticals illustrate, many of them will be wonderful people when considered across the totality of their person rather than just through the one lens. But yeah, at the end of the day, I think fitness is an important part of character and tends to build other important parts of character.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link