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 -
Perhaps it’s the result of different bubbles? Reading from a liberal university, stuff like “Reactionary Philosophy in a Nutshell” and “I Can Tolerate Anything Except the Outgroup” was mind-blowing stuff, and the anti-feminist essays were unthinkable. I really, honestly looked up to 2014 Scott as the epitome of someone who didn’t even have right-wing views but was willing to follow the truth even when it was ideologically uncomfortable for him. So seeing what he became is hugely disappointing, even putting aside the stuff I wrote in my other reply. Not just the careful avoidance of anything likely to upset, but the pigheaded blinders he puts on when defending his actual ingroup and beliefs. (EA not Jews, to avoid doubt).
I think part of the problem is that he got really full of himself because of Dominic Cummings and COVID and the substack income. He started treating himself as a Public Intellectual. Lately reading his stuff makes me feel like I’m being communicated at rather than to, like I’m hearing what Scott wants me to think not what he actually thinks.
There was a little glimmer of something interesting in the WWOTF review where he allowed himself to be an outsider for a little while, and then the blinders clamped back into place. Sad!
WWOTF?
What We Owe The Future, MacAskill's book. Part IV where he says logic is fake, Bertrand Russell was a witch, and playing the philosophy game is bad comes quite close to undercutting much or all of his utilitarian project, IMO, but since then he's not addressed those ideas/issues.
He had to have been aware of that, since the very next day he posted Tower of Assumptions, quite cheekily playing the philosophy game, though it doesn't go so far as getting your eyes pecked out by seagulls.
Thank you!
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link