site banner
PaperclipPerfector  5d ago (text post)   24185 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of April 21, 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.

Ouch. 4-pleb detected. The cool kids are over here getting a dozen 5s each and couldn't imagine getting a 4.

is this supposed to be a diss. Maybe I can send some passages of the math paper I am working on, and you can proofread them, as you've obviously way smarter. You must be so successful at life with that attitude.

If disparate impact is actually ended, expect every Walmart level job to have the equivalent of an IQ test.

This what the Wonderlic accomplishes (along with interview, which also is a screening mechanism), and according to people on reddit, it's very common and many companies use it. AFIK, the Wonderlic or any company that has used it has never been successfully sued for disparate impact on the grounds off the test itself. https://old.reddit.com/r/legaladvice/comments/x5qv4v/an_employer_gave_me_a_wonderlic_test_is_this/

What makes the Wonderlic particularly useful is it's not only very quick and cheap to proctor (no psychologist, unlike a full-scale IQ test), but it screens for both competence, like reading and math, and also functions as an IQ screen/filter on the high-end, due to rarity of top scores, which map to a bell curve and highly correlated with full-scale IQ.

Wonderlic is the test that literally lost Griggs.

The outcome is more nuanced. https://home.ubalt.edu/tmitch/645/articles/Cognitive%20AbilityTesting%20EF%20wonderlic.pdf

While the Griggs case is often mistakenly cited to call into question the lawfulness of cognitive ability testing, in reality the ruling on this case recognizes that these tests, as well as educational requirements and other hiring tools (e.g., criminal background checks, credit checks, experience requirements, physical requirements), are appropriate for assessing job applicants as long as certain criteria are met

My broader point being: The tests are widespread, as shown on reddit. Wonderlic and employers work together to ensure the tests are compliant and used appropriately, hence and there are a paucity of lawsuits, let alone successful ones, indicating it has been a success. I support unconditional use of tests for hiring, but it's wrong to say such testing does not exist or that a full-scale IQ test would be better, when the Wonderlic is by many measures better and already does that.

according to people on reddit, it's very common and many companies use it

Nice worthless anecdote

Jordan v. The City of New London

Absolutely irrelevant in this case

it's not only very quick and cheap to proctor

It's not cheap to get access. That's literally the point of my entire post, that the legal ass-covering needed to give the wonderlic is why testing is not done more often.

It is often, which was my point which you missed. I support the unconditional use of IQ tests for hiring/promotion, but it's wrong to say that testing is uncommon or that Griggs is preventing companies from using screening.

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