site banner
PaperclipPerfector  19d ago (text post)   35143 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of February 3, 2025

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.

5
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Hmm, how about some scissor questions?

  1. Is not saying something a lie? For example, if I notice that my friend has gained some weight, but I don't tell him so, am I lying to him? What if it's just an acquaintance?
  2. Is not giving your opinion a lie? For example, if someone proudly shows me his new car and I tell him without prompting that it's ugly, a purely subjective judgement, have I given him valuable information or have I insulted him unasked? Do you think he wanted that information?
  3. Do you think there is any difference between stating something unflattering, and conveying that information to them in a way that allows them to save face?

They, like me, believe their model of the world is sound, tested, and that the truth flows into it without obstruction.

I don't believe this about mine. Any model of the world more complex than "something exists that is thinking this thought" is capable of being swept away by sufficiently stringent devotion to truth. My worldview is like most people's: is a mixture of empirical observations seen through a subjective lens, moralisms, and lovingly constructed delusions. It is a house in which I can survive and it is like a living thing in that it is improved by some stress but destroyed by too much.

To a degree. To what degree, largely up to us. Like our mating behaviours are somewhere between the lifelong monogamy of some birds and the 50-women harem season of elephant seals.

For example, I believe that this is largely a lie lonely people tell themselves, as I did once upon a time. To quote Ripptoe on a different subject:

Physical strength is the most important thing in life. This is true whether we want it to be or not... Whereas previously our physical strength determined how much food we ate and how warm and dry we stayed, it now merely determines how well we function in these new surroundings we have crafted for ourselves as our culture has accumulated. But we are still animals – our physical existence is, in the final analysis, the only one that actually matters. A weak man is not as happy as that same man would be if he were strong. This reality is offensive to some people who would like the intellectual or spiritual to take precedence. It is instructive to see what happens to these very people as their squat strength goes up. (emphasis mine)

I believe the same is true of our social lives.

Is not saying something a lie? For example, if I notice that my friend has gained some weight, but I don't tell him so, am I lying to him?

Does he care about his weight, and mistakenly believes it has remained unchanged? If so, silence would be agreement, and so, a lie.

Is not giving your opinion a lie? For example, if someone proudly shows me his new car and I tell him without prompting that it's ugly, a purely subjective judgement, have I given him valuable information or have I insulted him unasked?

Such a conversation often includes the words ‘do you like my new car?’, that is a prompt , and you have to say it’s ugly. How does the conversation go with you? He shows you the car, says ‘it’s soooo beautiful!’ and you go ‘yes, I too find it wonderful’ (no you don’t, it’s fuckugly, that’s a lie).

Do you think there is any difference between stating something unflattering, and conveying that information to them in a way that allows them to save face?

Yes, but I don’t like it much, it’s a compromise required by human weakness. Ideally, honesty should always be forgiven.

The ‘saving face’ problem is that the conveying of information has been sullied by social status games. Some bits of information, criticism, are viewed as little arrows harming a person’s status. That is not conductive to a clear view of the world.

What are your lovingly constructed delusions? Tell me if I should lie to protect them, and I will.

For example, I believe that this is largely a lie lonely people tell themselves, as I did once upon a time.

I think your view is unfalsifiable. What if I produced a happy hermit? What if I told you I have experienced far more moments of happiness alone than in social settings?

What is modern atomization? To a large degree, people with alternatives, choosing to be alone. They could talk to their parents every day. They could go through their contacts or facebook friends and do something with a friend every day. But they choose not to. As to what little they do do, there were essentially no negative psychological consequences from covid, even though the threat and lockdowns stopped most social contact for a time.

I believe the same is true of our social lives.

So many things are the most important thing in life?

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