Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.
- 137
- 2
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
- Courtesy
- Content
- Engagement
- When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
- Proactively provide evidence in proportion to how partisan and inflammatory your claim might be.
- Accept temporary bans as a time-out, and don't attempt to rejoin the conversation until it's lifted.
- Don't attempt to build consensus or enforce ideological conformity.
- Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
- The Wildcard Rule
- The Metarule
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
The one time I saw a graph of hers posted somewhere (here, maybe) the instrument was a Twitter poll, which--I am no psychometrician but I took a few courses in stats, and more to the point research design--seems of dubious generalizability just considering the homogeneity of the sample (thirsty horndogs). Are these pilot questionnaires? Is there some degree of scrutiny of the research design or is it just ask some questions, get answers, and make interpretations? But honestly I have never looked too closely. Maybe there's more to it than I imagine.
She does a lot of Twitter polls, and I think it's important to recognize them for what they are, and not give them more or less credit than they deserve. They are not making grand sweeping claims about all human kind, they are looks into her follower base. They can be the first step to seeing if speculation into a topic is useful(what kinks are especially rare even among kinksters? Are any kinks that are thought rare actually ubiquitous?), where the Twitter poll is not supposed to be the final answer but rather the first question.
A lot of times too she looks into the relationships between two variables, like say income and kink. She might ask, Do you have an income over $100k? Are you kinky? Yes/Yes, Yes/No, No/Yes, No/No. Then the conclusion isn't that if 50% of responders say Yes/Yes, that 50% of Americans have an income over $100k and are kinky. It's about seeing that if more wealthy followers are kinky than wealthy followers are not kinky, but the relationship is reversed(or even just less extreme) among the poorer, there might be something interesting going on there. Among normal people the % of kinkiness for all groups might be lower, but it's quite plausible the same relationship will exist.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link