site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   31623 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of January 9, 2023

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.

14
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

In short, it's a movement that claims very smart people can solve all our problems, when in fact they cannot actually do that.

But it can tell us it had, or would have if not for those Red Tribe wreckers, and the vast majority will believe it. (COVID being the textbook example)

And thus what comes out long-term is not a religious revival, nor a rollback to 18th century Enlightenment, nor a return to feudal or Roman systems. Instead, it's either Orwell's boot stomping on a human face forever, or a true collapse of civilization with the megadeaths that entails.

And thus what comes out long-term is not a religious revival, nor a rollback to 18th century Enlightenment, nor a return to feudal or Roman systems. Instead, it's either Orwell's boot stomping on a human face forever, or a true collapse of civilization with the megadeaths that entails.

I disagree. I see little evidence that attempted dystopias are any more stable long-term than attempted utopias. Social science doesn't actually work that well, and so sooner or later, human nature regresses to the mean. Collapse of civilization is certainly a thing that can and has happened, and then new structures rise from the ashes. This is certainly inconvenient for us individually, but life is about significantly more than individual convenience, or even individual or group survival. I'm comfortable betting on my faith long-term, regardless of the circumstances.

My wife and I actually had a conversation about this a year or two after we got married. Looking at the increasing craziness of the world, the question arose of whether it was worth having children, given what a mess the world was in. My answer was that it was obviously worth it; the world is always a mess, and children are good regardless. Everyone experiences hardship and suffering in this life, and they also experience delight, joy, love, and many other good things besides. The idea that comfort or pleasure determines the value of life is a pernicious falsehood.

If the boot stomping on a human face isn't stable, we get gored by the other horn of the dilemma -- collapse of civilization and megadeaths. Yes, new structures arise from the ashes, and they probably will even if we get a collapse accompanied by a major nuclear exchange. That perhaps humanity will eventually rebuild a non-dystopic system is not much of a consolation. And while it is likely the structures arising from the collapse of civilization will include religion, it is quite possible Christianity will not survive in any recognizable form.

The new society will indeed be "red tribe" for a time; the unconstrained vision cannot survive easily visible and always-struggled-against constraints. Again, not much consolation.

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