site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   35585 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of November 28, 2022

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.

16
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Though maybe a large brain with 'unnecessary' space is necessary for having the excess capacity needed to develop higher level intelligence. But as we evolve and converge upon the most efficient brain size (which might be 400g?), we'll essentially become frozen as a species. We might even be more prone to devolve than anything else, as various groups don't 'use' particular parts of their brain.

This is a highly speculative tangent that probably makes me sound like a kook, but I always think about this scenario in the context of AI and automation - tasks that would select for fitness in humans are increasingly being outsourced to external agents. Let's say we stumble upon AGI and eventually ASI, and somehow we manage to make a "friendly" one and let it take over the tasks which are relevant to the functioning of society, like the creation and distribution of resources, policing and maintaining peace, etc. What selection pressures would exist to protect us from the accumulation of deleterious mutations in the genome and suffering a severe decline in our physical prowess and cognitive faculties? Even mate choice won't necessarily maintain these things, these behaviours and preferences can and will be disposed of when your child will fare equally well regardless of if they are a genius or a handicapped moron. All you really need to be is a prolific replicator, capability of your offspring be damned.

I suppose if we're at that point we'd likely also have the ability to genetically modify ourselves, which would probably allow us to stave that off indefinitely. But still, it's an unsettling idea that the traits we possess are conditional on them having use, and that a world where we no longer fight for existence might in and of itself pose a different, more insidious type of threat.

these behaviours and preferences can and will be disposed of when your child will fare equally well regardless

This will take time, and probably we will enter next phase of Malthusian cycle before these self-enforcing behaviors drop.

There are two general points of contention I have with this.

1: ASI would result in huge leaps and bounds in technology that would push the Malthusian condition very far out into our future. For example, we would not be restricted to our resources and energy on Earth. There's always the rest of our solar system, and huge amounts of energy could be harnessed via Dyson swarm. Additionally, an ASI might crack the problem of interstellar travel - manned trips to our neighbouring star systems don't seem undoable for an ASI, and we could spread outward from there. A Malthusian condition would certainly rear its head eventually (especially considering that our reachable universe is limited), but this would take a very long time, likely enough for humans to radically change before we hit it.

2: When we hit a Malthusian limit, in this case this doesn't necessarily mean that the loss of traits just stops. It just means that the ASI will have to engage in some form of population control to manage it. That doesn't change the fact that the AI as caretaker is distributing us all of our resources without any work necessary on our part, and policing us to make sure we don't steal from each other's allotments so we can get more than our fair share (presumably that would be undesirable). This essentially makes it so that the pressures that maintain physical and cognitive ability as well as mate preferences based on physical and cognitive ability are now gone. Some of us might not get to breed under a Malthusian condition, or we might all breed less, but in this scenario the ones that do breed are likely not doing so because of their intelligence or capability. It doesn't effectively screen out the deleterious mutations that cause loss of functioning.

state-issued ASI-mandated girlfriends?

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