Transnational Thursday is a thread for people to discuss international news, foreign policy or international relations history. Feel free as well to drop in with coverage of countries you’re interested in, talk about ongoing dynamics like the wars in Israel or Ukraine, or even just whatever you’re reading.
- 20
- 3
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 -
I'm still hoping that something truly crazy happens and we get Athanasius Schneider as the next Pope.
Eijk or Erdo seem to have the best realistic shot of the "obvious" conservatives. Conservative American Catholics have the fever dream of Burke, but that's just not going to happen - the American Catholic church is a weird combination of too powerful, in long term decline, and far to schizophrenic within itself to get that brass ring of a Papacy.
I have an unverifiable theory that a lot of even more liberal Cardinals see Pope Francais as a failed experiment in promoting a "third worlder." Conservative or note, I would be heavily included to wager the next Pope is from Europe - and nowhere east of Berlin.
I think success for a new Pope is clarity in doctrine of the faith and a renewed evangelization focused on bedrock truths that are unanimous; real presence, the trinity, marian sinlessness etc. Defenders of Pope Francais can quibble about intent and outcome, but I think it's safe to say that the man has been unnecessarily vague on many issues ("Who am I to judge?" ... "We're not blessing the union of same sex couples, but just the individuals who may or may not be in those couples") and has neglected a lot of the basic near unanimous issues (real presence is, imho, one of those rallying cries).
I still don't know entirely what to Make of Vatican 2 from a purely theological perspective. I do believe strongly that Vatican 2 created an opening for beige Catholicism. Once you have a watered down liturgy with Father Friendly playing an acoustic guitar and preaching about The Buddy Christ, a lot of kids who grow up in these kind of parishes end up leaving pretty quickly because it all starts to seem, well, fake and gay.
But it all stems from the same original issue - spending too much time paying attention to highly modern concerns that aren't at the core of the Faith. This is an inversion. "Hmmm, we really need to tackle the Catholic approach to climate change because climate change is really important in the world right now." The Church should not be led around by the concern of The World. The whole point is that it's helping to prepare the faithful for the Kingdom of God without getting bogged down and distracted by worldly distractions, pleasures, concerns.
So, I'd like to see a Pope who makes Playing The Hits a big part of his time in The Big Chair. Focus - and get others to focus - on the 2000 year old bedrock stuff. Maybe get a little tough on the Orthodox about the Filioque or something. Get behind the Latin Mass in a big way. Make Nuns Great Again.
We need a clear and strong - perhaps, "based", as the kids say - Catholic leader to reinvigorate the Church.
More options
Context Copy link