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.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Like Iconochasm, I didn't read the commenting as suggesting you do that, as much as that you could.
Now, I am not the person you were asking, have no personal sense of your practices, and so can't speak to your habbits, but if you were serious about seeking general suggestions...
'Be less aggressive' is probably the best advice if you raise it for yourself. That doesn't mean not having your position, but don't burn bridges for random encounters, and express a intellectual humilitary that acknowledges how you could be wrong, especially if it leaves a way for the other person to maybe be partially right.
For most/more casual people, overkill is worse than just enough. Providing context- rather than a direct challenge- is far less intimidating, and it doesn't need to be patronizing either. 'You might be interested in reading X, Y, Z' is a much more engaging way than 'You obviously hadn't read X, Y, Z.' A summation of points is better than filibustering and gish-galloping. Not addressing every point- and just being clear you're only addressing a few points for Reasons- makes an engagement more of a redirection (had you considered this/this isn't supported by other things) than a full body tackle (let me tell you how each and every one of your points is wrong). There are absolutely some people you should engage more for public audience perception than individual persuasion (ie, bad faith actors), but if you just think someone is wrong, it's rarely worth it to rub their nose in it. Unless, again, you're very explicit and deliberately deciding to write off future engagement with them.
Similarly, being generous with your own limited understanding- not in a 'I can't see how reasonable people could see that', but 'my own difficulties are in the nuances of X, Y, and Z'- can be a good salve, especially if it just-so-happens overlays with someone's interest/point. 'I believe you're wrong about much of what you say, but this is one area you may be right and I wrong' is a good way to offer a face saving exit to the other person, while presenting two tokens of respect to them. First, you recognize what they do right, not just disagree about what they do wrong. Second, you offer the respect of acknowledging your own limits, and that you might have something to learn from... if not them, then someone they might have read from, or respect in turn. This builds a different sort of dynamic, of senior-junior rather than master-novice, with a far less domineering tone. To pick a personal example, there are many cases when international politics come around that US-skeptic/anti-US people will do what I see as jumping to a conclusion that the US is to blame for [incident X]. Even if I disagree, I'm often willing to concede 'well, I wouldn't be surprised' in the mix of 'but all these other points really don't work.'
For the timing of your hobby horse, it's probably good to not jump into every thread/discussion on it- at least not to argue- but really just not being a one trick animal. Throw in a little variety in there- an effort post about something else, a piece of reflection not about your hobby, even some pop culture or something funny- just to prove you have other interests, and aren't obsessed about this One Thing.
Which- to reiterate- I don't think you are, because I don't have enough of an opinion on you to have an opinion. (Other than I read your ask as sincere, which I respect, as opposed to false-humility, which I don't.)
Thank you! All very good advice, and you were correct that I misread OP. Yes, I was being sincere.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link