site banner
PaperclipPerfector  12d ago (text post)   25876 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of December 23, 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.

8
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Are dog people convinced that all humans love dogs (except for evil humans) and therefore there ought not be a problem?

I think people who don’t like dogs are neurotic and/or weird, and they tend to have personality traits that I find off-putting.

My question is why.

In general, it comes from a desire to give their dogs better lives. Going to the grocery store is more fun and fulfilling for a dog than being locked in crate.

I don’t support dogs in grocery stores in general, but only because most owners lack skill and judgment, not because of a categorical objection.

During holiday shopping, I dont care about your skill and judgement, the dog is a problem simply for taking up space.

Do you think you can compare utils between dogs and humans?

That is, while I’m against harming dogs (or animals) wantonly, I don’t really value animal flourishing per se. I certainly don’t value animals well-being if it comes at the cost of humans (even if it is a minor nuisance).

From my experience, the dog obsessed are the ones with weird personality traits (eg my sister in law had her husband take her out to a fancy Mother’s Day dinner when she got her first dog).

Yes, and probably at a higher exchange rate than most. But more importantly, I value my dog’s utils highly, and many other people feel the same.

Well if we are laying cards on the table perhaps I am neurotic but I find your stated preference (and that of other dog lovers) to be anti human (and in some situations narcissistic). I think we elevate love of dog to be unnatural.

I suppose trading human utils for dog utils is “anti-human” in some literal sense because dogs are not humans. This does not make it unnatural or wrong, however.

This idea that “1 util of annoyance for me is worth more than 1,000,000 utils of your dog’s happiness” is actually kind of what I find off-putting about dog haters. Not only I disagree on an object level, but it tends to reflect their general mindset towards life. If they can’t even put up with being greeted by a friendly dog, they are likely not going to be an easy person to be around.

Even being the type of person who is willing to claim with full confidence that a dog has zero intrinsic worth compared to himself, and is then willing to act on this belief, to me shows a very concerning arrogance and lack of empathy. I just don’t want people like that around me.

If they can’t even put up with being greeted by a friendly dog, they are likely not going to be an easy person to be around.

The irony is killing me.

  1. I’m a very easy person to be around. I just don’t like being barked at and jumped on.

  2. I find the mindset of dog lovers to be “dogs are better than people.” They freely make statements like that. I’ve asked a few and they routinely say they’d save their dogs over humans if given the choice. But if that isn’t unnatural enough it frequently is that they love their dogs so much but rather that they often are somewhat misanthropic.

  3. My view is that dogs (and other animals) should not be harmed or mishandled. At the same time, I don’t believe they are capable of eudaimonia. So I don’t care about trying to make them happier but I do believe in trying to relieve their pain.

I find the mindset of dog lovers to be “dogs are better than people.” They freely make statements like that

Are any of these people not redditors or redditor-adjacent?

Yeah! I meet them all the time.

I would suggest the other poster is implicitly acknowledging that sometimes what their dog likes is superior to any harm caused to a human.

Yeah! I meet them all the time.

I guess I've been lucky, so far!

I would suggest the other poster is implicitly acknowledging that sometimes what their dog likes is superior to any harm caused to a human.

If you're referring to @sulla, I believe you're being hyperbolic. What I intepret them saying is that they're willing to entertain the idea that there can be a tradeoff between human and dog welfare, and that their dog would be count particularly highly.

Honestly, I agree with these premises, I would (for example) save most humans over my dog if presented with such a choice, but I often put their well-being over the annoyance of others (not taking them into the grocery store, though, you can just leave them tied outside).

How would you feel if a random mentally ill human who spends his time licking up his own vomit and sniffing random piles of feces came and licked you on the face as you walked by? Would reassurances by his family that he's "friendly" and "harmless" make any difference to your response?

While that story is weird, IME dog moms are basically normal women for whom being an actual mom is not an option at the moment, and they'll stop being that way after having a child.

I think for many of them being a mom could be achieved but-for a lot of individual choices that probably are misplaced

Yes, that’s what I mean.

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