site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1yr ago (text post)   30623 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of August 14, 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.

11
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

So 65% of Twitter are cooperatebots who don't think rationally about the specifics of the choices presented? Could be worse. I for one am thankful for such people because in real life "just save yourself bro" isn't always possible.

This makes me think 65% of Twitter are very gullible and easily manipulated if you stroke their egos correctly in the direction of "I am such a Nice Person, so moral, so pro-social, so generous!". No wonder there are so many online payment scams about "buy me a Ko-fi/donate to my tip jar, I need to pay for my dying mother's operation and I'm an only child and my abusive father left us years ago and I'm currently living in a cardboard box existing on one can of cold baked beans a month".

Disagree. Picking blue is painless in the Twitter poll. There is zero harm to them. So they can posture with zero consequences.

I realise I'm being very mean and horrible, but hey, I'm a red picker so what do you expect? 😁

Yeah, posturing is what it seems to be all about. I'd be more convinced of the Ethical Upwardness if there were less "and you're a dirty mean no-good if you pick red" about it.

And I'd still rather have such choices be up to them rather than oh so rational, so actually prosocial, so non-virtue-signalling Mottizens.

I'd prefer somebody who thinks I have a brain in my head, not that I'm a dementia-patient developmentally challenged toddler who will run into a blender, so they have to tie the bib around my neck and make the White Saviour choice for me.

I have a saviour, thanks; Jesus Christ, our Lord. The salvific death on the cross is sufficient once and for always, I don't need the Twitterati to save my soul or my ass.

Good, it's not about saving you.

I don't know what people on Twitter are thinking - I suspect it's a non-representative audience. I was imagining something on the scale of a nation or the world.

My assumption is that no matter how obviously dumb the choice, any binary poll like this is going to have some significant number of people choosing each option. Is it okay to just kill Lizardman's Constant of a population? Given that picking Blue is voluntary, you might have a different calculus around that.

But my thought was that this is a question that depends very much on how everyone else is voting. My feeling is that a complete wipeout either way is fine, but realistically a complete wipeout is unlikely, and even something as one-sided as 80% Red or 90% Red is still far more casualties than I'm willing to shrug off. And if it isn't? A narrow win for Blue is fine. A narrow win for Red is the worst thing to happen to civilisation in recorded history. Even the Black Death killed, what, 30% of Europe? 40%? 60% Red is one of the worst disasters to have ever happened. Shooting for 51% Blue and asking people to cooperate seems like a safer strategy.

I feel like you're approaching this as if you have a lot more control than you actually do. If you expect 80% of people to choose red sure it's tragic that 20% of people are going to die but you can't stop that tragedy by picking blue too. You're only killing yourself

Yes, if I think the result will probably be 80% Red, then of course I pick Red myself. If this is done like a referendum with a lot of polling and a chance for campaigning, it would be very interesting and that would affect my vote.

If I had to choose completely blindly... well, that's where it would get scary.

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