site banner
PaperclipPerfector  16d ago (text post)   30799 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of December 2, 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.

4
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

You can provide them the information that you have. That includes information like negotiated prices, so they are not only looking at sticker prices.

Why are we involved when it's the insurance who decides what things costs and how much to pay.

You are both parties to the determination of price. If you don't think you're involved at all, then I will just go tell all the health insurance CEOs that they can stop getting shot by just paying you $1 for everything. After all, you're not involved at all with anything related to prices, so that couldn't change anything, right?

...or are you involved somehow?

Again, the only group that actually gains anything from maximally clear information is insurance companies since it improves their bargaining position. This information has no practical value to consumers and as is self-evident at this point, is confusing and misleading.

So is your goal to improve profits and rent-seeking for insurance?

If your goal is improve consumer choice or spending, or decrease healthcare costs...pick something that does that.

You are not providing any information to the insurance company. They already get the price that you charge them (that's in the bill that you send them); they already have the negotiated price (you both agreed to it). You are providing information to your patients.

EDIT: I love how it magically changed from totally meaningless information that was complete nonsense, because the insurance company decides everything anyway and they have it all anyway.... to absolutely critical and vital information, such that if the insurance company gets even a whiff of it, it'll be an insane disaster. Like wow, dude. Listen to yourself.

You are providing information to your patients.

This information has no value to patients. You cannot use this information to make more informed decisions. You cannot use this information to find cheaper care. Or more expensive care. You can give them false certainty, that's about it.

In situations where the information has value (like prescriptions)....we give this information to patients and there are a number of robust tools to facilitate this, even apps.

You are asking for something that has no value and has costs. Stop doing that. This is why healthcare is expensive. If you want to improve something please do! I'll support you. Don't make things more expensive for no reasons for fucks sake.

You already agreed that it can have value. Just give them the information that you have. You're out of excuses.

I did not.

Yes you did.

...did you listen to what I said at all?

Yup. You said that costs sometimes matter. Just inform your patients.

More comments

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