site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1d ago (text post)   1765 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for February 23, 2025

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

1
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Imagine for a second you belief the vaccines are safe.

Great, even if fatality rates for kids from COVID were super low....well what's the harm? Plus you get the added benefit of herd immunity!

This sounds like a wonderful idea.

Not to me -- the safety of these particular vaccines vis a vis myocarditis is still kind of up in the air AFAIC, but giving the benefit of the doubt on that due to fog of war doesn't get you off the hook. They were also produced on an accelerated timeline as compared to what's normally considered safe by the FDA, and contained some pretty new tech. Even if you believe that vaccines in general are safe, there were unknown unknowns with these ones that really require a sane cost-benefit assessment.

Anyways, if it's such a wonderful idea, why didn't the public health people make that argument instead of trotting out every cancer kid they could find who had the bad luck to die of (or with) covid and scream to anyone who would listen "GET YOUR KIDS VAXXED -- YOU DON'T WANT CHILDREN TO DIE, DO YOU?"?

I don't disagree that the approach was mangled but I think the science is settled now and for adults its something like benefits outweigh the risks for everyone except for very young men (I don't know kids though).

This was a unique situation though where people very publicly turned off their brains because of politics. That doesn't happen very often, and it's always pretty obvious when it's happening (still the case with any medical content that is significantly woke adjacent).

Most of public health this caveat does not apply.

That doesn't happen very often, and it's always pretty obvious when it's happening

I'm just not sure that's true -- they lied to us about various covid related facts because they thought it was Very Important That People Do As They Are Told; thing is, they think that about the flu and HPV too. Was covid an aberration, or a removal of masks? I don't really know, but am pretty skeptical of any recommendations based on unverifiable statistical data as opposed to a clear and present benefit case. (Both I and my kids have the usual childhood vaccinations BTW, and I should probably get a tetanus booster at some point -- I'm not anti-vax per se, but I'm not a sucker either.)

Doctors weren't the source of the liberal media establishment brain download they were a recipient, just like everyone else.

In addition, most of what happened was a political problem and just like all other political problems the correct facts were arranged.

Flu and HPV do not have the same problems (at least not right now), but again look at the primary source data! Actually research! It doesn't take much effort to see that a lot of what was stated with COVID was shaky or speculative.

Meanwhile the research base for the other stuff is robust and transparent.

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