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 -
We actually already have pretty good evidence which option works best here. Economic analysis shows that the productivity of high ability people goes up almost exponentially when in close proximity to other high ability people. This is an example of what is known as a “network effect” the flip side of which is when we put antisocial criminals together in a prison we accelerate their criminality. Like attracts and works best with like.
According to these principles diversity is a major obstacle to innovation and productivity. No one demanded that the Manhattan project be more diverse. Somehow a highly homogeneous team of male Hungarian Jewish geniuses pulled off major innovation, if DEI existed back then we would probably have never developed the bomb.
Anyway, hence we need high ability people together to get the most out of them. That’s if you actually care about society as a whole and not myopically focused on the welfare of a few antisocial criminal underclass cultural groups.
It is interesting response to “diversity is our strength.” That argument goes that there are biases so even if you don’t always hire the best person you have a better team.
A response is that diversity has benefits and costs so figuring out the direction and size of the direction is difficult.
Your point is that talent is exponential; not merely additive.
It’s a silly argument. Does anyone seriously think a diversity in work ethic makes for a better team? A diversity in intelligence? How about a diversity of medical conditions?
For there to be a true diversity to prevent biases you’d need viewpoint diversity. Somehow that one never makes the cut.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link