site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1yr ago (text post)   29063 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of August 28, 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.

10
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Thanks for replying! Didn't realize I was one of the most frequent commenters here, I should probably scale that back a bit.

Deranged”, “annoying,” “crazy,” “angry,” “hate[ful],” etc. are all too typical labels lobbied onto wrong-thinkers, as a shaming tactic and an attempt to poison the well

Totally fair point. I get personally annoyed by the argument you put forward because I fell fully into it for many years, and it ruined many of my closest relationships with people which I will never get back. It also turned me bitter and angry at the world for a long time.

At the same time, there was a lot of truth in it. I learned to be more confident and the importance of actually contributing to the world instead of complaining.

I suppose I am, to a similar degree to which I worsen the problem of relationships between job seekers and employers, investors and financial advisors, tax-payers and government, by providing advice—or recounting a summary of my personal experiences—on job-seeking, investing, and tax-minimization here, elsewhere on the interwebs, or in person. I've not promoted the Wonderfulness of employers, financial advisors, and governments.

I would (with some caveats) generally say the employers, financial advisors, and governments are made up of people who have good intentions. I think the tendency to act as if they've all defected and there isn't a single good employer our there is indeed 'toxic,' in that it's an unhealthy mindset which will only lead to more suffering. Same goes for women.

Yes, the mature response is to just be a Decent Person and a Real Man, continue to cooperate in the face of defection, and win hearts and minds by kindly walking women and their allies through issues as if you’re their “boys”, brothers, fathers, etc.

This is a caricature of my position, and I'm pretty damn far from any sort of actual 'enlightenment,' but you're not necessarily wrong. I'm generally a fan of more civil strategies. In terms of actually doing this it doesn't look like being what you would call a 'nice guy,' it instead looks more like being a stern father. The ability to be truly kind and help others requires a relationship with anger, which I find to be the central issue with redpill esque arguments.

I know I came across as a bit of a dick in my post, but I am genuinely sympathetic to your position. I believed in the same things you believed, once.

Thanks for replying! Didn't realize I was one of the most frequent commenters here, I should probably scale that back a bit.

Don't do that if you're thinking you're bothering others, imo commenting frequently is fine if your posts are often good and yours are (and often get upvotes). And you're not the most frequent, netstack has 500 more than you, I'm about the same in total.

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