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 -
Interesting, this concept of moralism being lower status. If so it suggests high status people are amoral, so populists are right to be suspicious of them. Everyone from Epstein and co. to Silicon Valley EA folk.
Woke elites suck all the air out of the room, consumed as they are by a so-called new puritanism. But a lack of puritanism may be a bigger problem. It's the broad PMC - the normies and 99% of the elite - that want to institute a moral framework whereaa the true high status people calling the shots are essentially still living in the carefree vaunted 90s.
It doesn't follow that those who aren't moralists are amoral. A moralist does not have to consistent, honest, effective, intelligent, or correct, and their actions, or the actions they desire others to take, do not have to make the world a better place. All a moralist needs is to think they will.
A moral non-moralist however, merely needs to think that not evangelizing or exemplifying is sufficient, and they may be right.
"A moral non-moralist" is quite literally a contradiction in terms.
No. A moralist is one who virtue signals their morality and makes it their identity by declaring themselves above the immoral, a righteous example for all to behold. One can be completely moral in thoughts and actions without preening about it like a moralist.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Moral non-moralist? I suppose evangelism must then be subject to such a difference of degree than that it becomes a difference in kind. How would we even know that a moral non-moralist is not themselves a moralistic (too much moralism) or amoral (not enough). Some form of radar must detect it.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link