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 -
Not for nothing, I would bet there's a HUGE crossover in the types who want to accumulate a ton of wealth as fast as possible then coast off the interest and those who declare they want to live childfree. Both kind of speak to the same sort of core mentality "life is for me to live, and any constraints that require me to do things at the behest of other people (a boss, or a child) is unacceptable."
Also, as I've gotten older I've REALLY soured on the idea of 'traveling' in the abstract as a hobby. Because I've begun to notice that most locales that are 'worth visiting' start optimizing into tourist traps, well designed to extract as much money from the average person as they can while returning minimal/ephemeral value.
Like the OP is pointing out, owning an asset that benefits from heavy tourism means you can coast off other people's labor. Owning the asset makes you money. Visiting and spending money there makes you a bit of a sucker, therefore.
As you say, if I could instead spend that time, effort, and money building something, I think the fulfillment will greatly outweigh that of being the billionth person to, e.g. photograph the Grand Canyon or hike Mount Fuji.
That said, for purposes of human happiness, some environments are definitely more conducive to comfort and pleasant feelings than others. Places that are beautiful and comfortable in the summer can become frozen wastelands in winter, and the there's a similar issue with places that are pleasant in Winter.
And moving yourself around to exploit the benefits of different locales is sensible from a purely Hedonic perspective.
The Grand Canyon is awesome, in the true meaning of the word. Seeing it at least once definitely beats working all the time, even if you are building something.
Not sure. Seeing it one time would surely be awe-inspiring.
I've been to Montana and seen much of Yellowstone, similar kind of feeling of reverence for the sheer majesty of nature.
But once you've done it... what are you left with?
What legacy does it leave of your existence?
Ashes to ashes; dust to dust; most of us will be utterly forgotten within a generation or two, no matter what we do. Spending all our energy trying to avoid that fate is futile, it's not unreasonable to spend time living in the present.
I just categorically disagree that this logic holds as a means to not care about the future.
I can say, that if the records existed, I, personally would like to search my genetic ancestry back 1000 years (at least!) and learn a bit about every single human being whose genes ended up in my genome.
And, we pretty much have the necessary technology such that, in 1000 years, someone in the future could look up information about YOU and thereby 'remember' your existence well beyond 2 generations out.
And there are certainly things you can do now to bump up the odds that someone will remember you further out.
Yes, that doesn't 'matter' to you once you're dead, but taking this nihilist position doesn't give you any reason to prefer any outcome over any other!
So hey, I won't try and convince you that one outcome matters over the other. I'll continue working to marginally increase the chances that the outcomes I prefer come about. From your logic, it's no more a waste of time to do that than to live for the present.
In short, accepting that life is ephemeral is one thing, but choosing to live as though the future won't exist is, if you believe what I do, a COPE.
Anyhow, I leave you with some distilled Hopium: Isaac Asimov's 'The Last Question.'
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Is leaving a legacy of your existence your ultimate goal in life? Can you give me some reason why it should be mine? After all, I certainly won't be here to know about it.
To the extent there is any coherent goal that one can pursue, leaving behind some legacy of your own to influence future generations is pretty much the only thing any organism can do that matters.
That is how 'life' sustains itself. It's pretty much the only reason anything you like about your life even exists. So however you choose to live your life (unless it is constant agony, I suppose), be thankful that there were people before you who cared about what happened in the future.
No!
But if you pursue goals that do not leave legacies, and I pursue goals that DO leave legacies, only one of our value systems/biological heritage is likely to propogate into the future and have impact on how that future unfolds.
Which is to say, your kind get out-competed in the natural selection race, and so its going to be a future dominated by legacy-leavers who will be very thankful that all their ancestors were legacy-leavers.
I'm thankful my ancestors were legacy-leavers, so it isn't particularly strange to me that I should want to leave a legacy.
If that isn't enough of a reason, I won't attempt any further to change your mind, and we have no quarrel anyway. Just don't interfere with other people who want to leave legacies!
Your argument is circular: you've decided that propagation of genes matters so by your definition it's "the only thing that matters".
That's not quite what I'm saying.
Propagation of genes matters if there is to be any future where intelligent life exists at all.
I don't begrudge the nihilists who don't think there's anything 'special' about intelligent life or humans in particular, and who think that the universe is utterly apathetic to our continued existence.
However, I doubt that they can have any real certainty in that regard.
I think it is preferable to have someone (intelligent and conscious) around to experience the future and see where it's going, than to not have anyone around at all. So in order to ensure that there is someone around, I can either figure out how to live forever, or do things that will help ensure that intelligent life exists in the future.
One of the most succinct explanations for why you might want to keep plugging along in spite of it all, was delivered by Lex Fucking Luthor in the Justice League Animated Series.
"Objectively speaking, nothing matters! So go forth and do stuff that matters... to you."
My other favored response to people who say "why bother" is Asimov's The Last Question.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link