site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of December 30, 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.

9
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

So do you believe the rest of the application like the motivation texts and maybe some smaller questions (depends on the university, it's been a little while since I used Common App) should not matter at all? Even though there can be tremendous differences personality-wise in students with equal SAT scores, and assuming we are aiming to train America's future elite in the top universities, those can have a significant effect?

For example leadership, agreeableness, emotional intelligence, and discipline come to mind. I would strongly prefer a disagreeable charismatic student getting the spot over someone who is essentially a drone and exclusively studying all day. Of course, those skills are barely quantifiable in general and probably hard to determine based on a thousand words, but it should be a good estimate already.

In other words, is "fair" referring to the fact that SAT correlates strongly with IQ and we just want the highest IQ individuals, which is a point I can see, or a moral judgment differentiating by what we could call "aptitude", in which case my text applies?

The problem with a lot of that stuff lends itself well to selecting for things that signify race, or wealth, or being a progressive. An essay about an experience that changed your life is going to naturally give off all kinds of demographic data. You going to a public school for the first time at age ten and meeting your first poor kid signals wealth. You volunteering overseas signals wealth. You doing church work signals conservative values and working for a nonprofit signals liberal values. It’s almost impossible that you can look very deep at stuff like that and not be able to know who the person is.

I agree with you that many of those characteristics could potentially be important. The disagreement is that obviously college admissions professors are unqualified, or even anti-qualified, to make such evaluations.