site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of April 15, 2024

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.

5
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I have a meta question about the study of group differences and don't know anywhere else to ask it.

If the claim "group A is on average different to group B on X measure" receives the response "But that difference actually disappears when you control for C variable, so the cause of the difference is not inherent, it must be C that causes it"

If controlling for something causes the average difference to disappear, would this not simply be selecting for individuals within both groups who have similar genes which cause them to be more similar? This seems like you're not not comparing the entirety of group A to the entirety of group B, but you're just comparing a subgroup of group A to a subgroup of group B - when the original claim was that the entire groups differ in the average. This seems like a fallacy.

I think this paper is what you are looking for.

Sociologist's fallacy

Can you give us an example of this? I am curious to dig into a simulation where controls are impossible.

IQ and socioeconomic status is what I had in mind

E.g. USA blacks and whites have same IQs after you "control" jointly for individual's income, education, marital status (and other factors which are downstream of IQs)

or, jokingly, controlling for lattitidue, Texas and Alaska have same climate.

Those seem like backronyms rather than inseparable conditions with no directional causation.

what do you mean?