Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.
- 90
- 1
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
- Courtesy
- Content
- Engagement
- When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
- Proactively provide evidence in proportion to how partisan and inflammatory your claim might be.
- Accept temporary bans as a time-out, and don't attempt to rejoin the conversation until it's lifted.
- Don't attempt to build consensus or enforce ideological conformity.
- Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
- The Wildcard Rule
- The Metarule
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I just finished reading The Cider House Rules by John Irving. It’s a great bildungsroman — a coming-of-age novel — with a large and lovable cast of side characters and subplots. Irving has a wry sense of humor, and is a keen observer of human psychology. I appreciated the non-judgmental, philosophically nuanced way he treats his characters; this is not a plot-heavy, action-packed adventure story, but rather a cozy and thought-provoking journey through the minds of people making the best of highly suboptimal situations. Irving’s carefully-researched attention to detail lends the book authenticity and a “lived-in” vibe.
That being said, abortion is a central element of the story, including graphic descriptions of both the procedure and the reasons why women seek abortions. Although some of the characters are morally-conflicted about the practice, ultimately the book presents a persuasive case for the necessity of abortion access, even given that some characters avail themselves of it for selfish or bourgeois reasons. The author’s boomer-leftist/soft-socialist sympathies shine through at times, filtered through the perspectives of his point-of-view characters.
For those here who have strong pro-life beliefs, and/or those who would be made squeamish by frank and explicit depictions of abortion and dead fetuses, I would definitely not recommend this book. I have not yet watched the film adaptation (featuring, from what I understand, stellar performances by Michael Caine, Tobey Maguire, and in-her-prime Charlize Theron) but I gather that it tones down the graphic nature of the book somewhat.
Irving's prose I always enjoyed, and I remember reading A Prayer For Owen Meany and thinking it could have been a timeless, beautiful novel if not for the constant intrusion of his politics (Iran Contra and Reagan). I still enjoyed it, and the Dickens influence on Irving is evident.
I've never read that book, but I read somewhere that this song, which I love, was inspired by it.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
I saw the film back when it came out, and I think it gets about as graphic as a mass-market Oscar-bait film can get away with, i.e. not very. From what I recall we see a doctor sit down to perform an abortion and we see someone revolted after looking into a bucket implied to contain an aborted fetus, but there's very little actual blood on screen.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link