site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   36040 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 20, 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.

13
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Sure you don't like them. Islam spread by force of arms, and as soon as war took more than riding a camel/horse/elephant into battle, they sucked at it. Changing strategies might be a good idea if they were capable of it. Left to their own devices they degenerate into isis or at best pakistan. Anyway that's not the point. No matter how many West-critical studies you quote or disgust you express at this or that western quirk, those things are not your true objection. You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.

Pray tell, what is my true objection?

qutb's and ben laden's.

Which is?

Their religious beliefs. Although you will probably choose a more defensible motte, "admiration of the culture" or similar nonsense.

Okay look, "I don't believe you, even if you say otherwise I know you really just want to jihad us" is going beyond uncharitable.

If you ask someone what they believe and they tell you, you don't have to believe them, but you can't just keep calling them a liar because it doesn't fit your assumptions.

Let's hear it then. @BurdensomeCount, deny the shahada, and I'll treat you with great charity.

No, why would I do that? The Shahada is fundamental to what it means to be a Muslim and I will not deny it. It's just saying that God is one and that Muhammad is His messenger, nothing more than that.

But really, what does the Shahada have to do with my dislike of Western modernity?

There you go @Amadan.

Burdensomecount plays the part of a cynic, a neutral critic of the west’s foibles, but that is not who he really is. He is a religious man. The religion he identifies with was thoroughly humiliated by the west, that is why he hates it.

All of his religion’s claims to Truth, to Greatness, to the welfare of its people, have crumbled into dust. No one is more aware of it than he is, living in the godless west. For all his talk of the dysfunctionality of the west, he is so cognizen of his religions’ shortcomings and foul fruits, that he would rather live among his enemies than among his friends. Far from the light of his God, and yet so much brighter.

The cognitive dissonance causes him to lash out at his hosts in trollish barbs, so they can feel his pain.

More comments

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