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.
- 111
- 7
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 -
Where do you draw the line between rock and roll and rock? Like, I would place the Beatles right at the drainage divide, with everyone else in the British Invasion worth mentioning being rock musicians.
If you follow the kitchen sink rules of the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, then I nominate "Papa's Got a Brand New Bag" by James Brown and "Lose Yourself" by Eminem.
I would define rock and roll in its pure form by that clip from Back to the Future, when Michael J. Fox does the guitar solo and the 50s teens who were dancing are just left going wtf even is that. Stuff past that gets into your heavy metal, your hardcore punk, etc. That's the test I picture in my head. You can play a later rock and roll song to an earlier audience, and that audience would recognize it as rock and roll music.
To me, almost everything by The Beatles would play just fine at a Chuck Berry joint, same with the Stones, and most of Led Zeppelin or the Who as well. Maybe the audience wouldn't love it but they'd recognize it as the same kind of music they like. For me the line comes somewhere around like Iron Maiden and Judas Priest on the metal side, and then bands like Black Flag and the Dead Kennedys on the punk side. That's where I'd imagine the music/content reaches the point where your hypothetical 50s crowd coming out to hear Roll Over Beethoven gets confused.
Lose Yourself is an interesting one, I feel like I can't take it seriously because it's a movie song.
Well, War Pigs came out in 1970 and wouldn't fly with the rock'n'roll crowd. As did Child in Time (I love the stone faces of the audience). So, on one hand, I think the birth of hard rock and metal and their emergence at the genres of rock should disqualify post-Woodstock rock'n'roll songs from being considered the best. But on the other hand, would I really disqualify the songs by 3 Inches of Blood from being on a "best of heavy metal" list just because they were written after it became a niche genre?
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link