site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   34966 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 6, 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.

16
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

My first thought when you said "UFOs attracted to nuclear" was "Oh, they're going to point out that nuclear crap can screw with instruments and human eyes, and the underwater stuff gets a lot easier to explain away." But you went in the complete opposite direction.

It's not about hard belief in screwing with physics being impossible. It's the complexity of it all. Aliens exist and casually interstellar travel and visit Earth regularly and are content to just troll rather than any of them just dropping the charade. ... Or people are seeing weird lights and our instruments are under a century old and dealing with novel stuff like nukes and weird sky crap. One's way, way simpler than the other. Both are possible, but why do trolly aliens seem more probable?

Or an alien AI singularity decided to park a bunch of drones under the ocean when the local monkeys started building cities. Pays to keep abreast of developing intelligences, lest they become a nuisance in a scant few thousand years.

Or alien equivalent of kids poking a bug with stick for fun (before they stomp on it). Because the gap between us and interstellar aliens would be like this.

This is why there is no point agonizing about aliens - it they are real, they understand us better than we understand ourselves and can do to us and with us anything they wish. The ball is in their court.

And aliens are not real, preponderance of evidence glows like New Year fireworks and points to long running psyop - more precisely, series of psyops since 1940's (plus all kinds of con men and crazies jumping on the bandwagon).

Good question. What would cound as evidence proving existence of aliens beyond reasonable doubt?

Independently verified physical evidence. Word of government, any government of Earth, is not sufficient.

For example:

  • clearly intelligent signal from space, confirmed by radioastronomers from all over the world, from direction where is no Earthly space probe

  • clearly intelligently designed artifact somewhere in Solar System, observed by at least two space probes belonging to rival great powers

  • alien artifact or material declassified by Eartly government, studied by scientists from all over the world and confirmed as something that is beyond human ability to create

Since when did nuclear energy mess with people's vision? Cosmic rays can cause bright flashes in the eyeball apparently but you only get them in space.

I guess that if you're really hit hard with ionizing radiation then you'd see something odd. It certainly messes with photography. But you'd die pretty quickly after that, if the intensity is so high you can see it with the naked eye. How does nuclear energy interfere with sonar or radar? Nuclear materials aren't like old temples to pagan deities in horror movies, they don't produce random, spooky encounters.

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