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 -
I'm not most people. If you don't think I will keep my word, then simply don't bet at all. You don't see me offering this bet on 4chan, nor would I offer it to a throwaway account. If you're a regular here with even a minimal amount to lose, I can at least debate the odds and stakes.
I read that point and disagree with it. It signals that both people have strong conviction and confidence in their beliefs, and I fail to see how that makes either of them losers. I would respect someone with the confidence to stake anything at all beyond words more, and so would many other rats or rat-adjacents, regardless of whether they win or not. I certainly lose a great deal of respect for people who bow out before they even get to that point, no matter what excuses they raise to justify it.
Presuming the Motte still exists when said bet resolves, he would have my permission to point and laugh if I reneged on the deal, as long as he returned the favor.
No, I am not sufficiently confident that you will keep your word.
Of course, politeness norms normally preclude saying that, but you are taking advantage of politeness norms when you use my failure to say that as reason why I shouldn't mind betting. So I have to say it.
Like I said, it's your call. You're evidently willing to pay the small price of losing a portion of my respect, not that I expect you to lose sleep over it.
I certainly am not so full of myself that I can't accept that someone might not want to take up a bet with a pseudonymous stranger, my issue is only that you claimed to have a general aversion to betting at all, and didn't bother to caveat it with even (excessive) qualifiers like offering bets to people you'd lend money. If that counts as "talking advantage of politeness norms" to you, I clearly disagree.
For what it's worth, a person here here has already offered me substantial sums with absolutely no strings attached, and I haven't taken it up because my condition isn't so dire that I can't do without it. No, I'm not going to post proof, unless said person sees this and approves disclosure. I'm happy that someone values me enough to make the same offer.
Because most people don't routinely add nitpicky qualifiers to statements like that.
If I tell you that I don't eat brussels sprouts, I may in fact eat brussels sprouts if I was offered $500 to do so, or if there was a gun at my head. The fact that I left that out isn't "didn't bother to caveat it", that's talking normally.
Besides, I did say:
in a different post. Pointing out that I didn't say it in the exact post you're referring to is an even worse nitpick.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link