site banner
PaperclipPerfector  1yr ago (text post)   31718 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of August 12, 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
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I find euthanasia by injection in a hospital disgusting and barbaric and aesthetically displeasing, whereas something like a speedy decapitation in a beautiful natural environment is preferable

Speedy decapitation!? Being less barbaric?

A hospital can deal with things going wrong, controlled settings, blood born pathogens, etc.

Why would what you find pleasing have anything to do with it? Do you have any idea how arrogant that sounds?

Speedy decapitation!? Being less barbaric?

Yeah the whole "execution style" is where he lost me, too. Made me think the whole thing might be a modest proposal.

...

Personally, I'm going out in a blaze of glory like Bohdi's 100 year storm, or else a purple haze of tangerine trees and marmalade skies.

Why would what you find pleasing have anything to do with it?

It is his very humane endeavour

To make each senior spent

Unwillingly represent

A source of innocent merriment,

Of innocent merriment!

If one is so outside the overton window as to suggest killing off people one thinks are a net negative on the fiscus and society, why go full hog and not even consider the sensations experienced by those sacrificed for the greater good? It is to me a lesser evil to suggest a method of execution which might cause more pain for a short period of time, than to suggest killing off innocent people in the first place.

I want to die when my brain is starting to go and limit my emotional enjoyment from kin, and my body can't enjoy things like food or sex anymore. Give me the ultracocaine, overdose on cialis and let me fuck a sexbot until my heart explodes. Also, best if I can calculate my anticipated savings from insurance payouts and have the insurer refund a balance of the payout to my beneficiaries. I'm saving you money by not living out of spite, give my kids some money to offset their trauma of grandpas livestreamed fisto 9000 sexfight.

A speedy decapitation is the least barbaric method I can conceive of. Reasonable attached heads may differ. It is quick, relatively painless, and inexpensive. There have already been some higher tech forms of decapitation that developed over the centuries, like the guillotine. I would rather trust a well-designed instrument of physical decapitation than a doctor’s lethal injection that is liable to all sorts of errors. Something also seems wrong to me about filling a human with foreign chemicals before his death. What I find pleasing is relevant because the post considers, essentially, the optimal way to treat death. So what is aesthetically preferable matters. Others will have their own aesthetic preference, but it can’t be ignored completely — how many people are against “dying before SHTF” because of the gross culture surrounding it? The word “euthanasia”, the doctor, the injection, the hospital room… this is so displeasing that it actually biases us against a pretty reasonable argument.

A speedy decapitation is the least barbaric method I can conceive of.

Skydiving without a parachute has always been my preferred autoeuthanistic endeavor, though as a Christian I am honor-bound never to do such.

Did some looking at the early church and I’ve come away with a different interpretation

Tertullian addressing Christians in prison who were awaiting martyrdom, encouraged and strengthened them by citing the example of famous suicides including Lucretia, Dido and Cleopatra. Chrysostom and Ambrose both applauded Palagia, a girl of 15 who threw herself off the roof of a house rather than be captured by Roman soldiers. In Antioch, a woman called Domnina and her two daughters drowned themselves to avoid rape, an act which, as in the case of the Jews, was venerated. […] Jerome also approved of suicide for religious reasons and did not condemn austerities which undermine the constitution and which might be regarded as slow suicide. He recounts, with the greatest admiration, the life and death of a young nun named Belsilla who imposed such penalties on herself that she died.

Tertullian is considered the father of western theology and he writes

It would take me too long to enumerate one by one the men who at their own self-impulse have put an end to themselves. As to women, there is a famous case at hand: the violated Lucretia, in the presence of her kinsfolk, plunged the knife into herself, that she might have glory for her chastity. Mucius burned his right hand on an altar, that this deed of his might dwell in fame. The philosophers have been outstripped — for instance Heraclitus, who, smeared with cow dung, burned himself; and Empedocles, who leapt down into the fires of Ætna; and Peregrinus, who not long ago threw himself on the funeral pile. For women even have despised the flames. Dido did so, lest, after the death of a husband very dear to her, she should be compelled to marry again; and so did the wife of Hasdrubal, who, Carthage being on fire, that she might not behold her husband suppliant as Scipio's feet, rushed with her children into the conflagration, in which her native city was destroyed. Regulus, a Roman general, who had been taken prisoner by the Carthaginians, declined to be exchanged for a large number of Carthaginian captives, choosing rather to be given back to the enemy. He was crammed into a sort of chest; and, everywhere pierced by nails driven from the outside, he endured so many crucifixions. Woman has voluntarily sought the wild beasts, and even asps, those serpents worse than bear or bull, which Cleopatra applied to herself, that she might not fall into the hands of her enemy. But the fear of death is not so great as the fear of torture. And so the Athenian courtezan succumbed to the executioner, when, subjected to torture by the tyrant for having taken part in a conspiracy, still making no betrayal of her confederates, she at last bit off her tongue and spat it in the tyrant's face, that he might be convinced of the uselessness of his torments, however long they should be continued. Everybody knows what to this day is the great Lacedæmonian solemnity— the διαμαστύγωσις, or scourging; in which sacred rite the Spartan youths are beaten with scourges before the altar, their parents and kinsmen standing by and exhorting them to stand it bravely out. For it will be always counted more honourable and glorious that the soul rather than the body has given itself to stripes

So at least two major Christian thinkers had an approximately utilitarian view of suicide, namely that is it virtuous when the Good it accomplishes his greater than the bad it effects. And I don’t think it is too hard to defend “utilitarian suicide” from a Christian schema generally. It’s an acknowledgment that we belong to God and that God wishes us to love each other; it’s an act of love to others that we die before we cause immense pain; it acknowledges death; it acknowledges that a virtuous life matters more than clinging to years; and so on.

I’m an individualist American, an objectivist libertarian, and well versed in Western mental health models. This informs my Christianity that I should strive for health as one of my highest utility functions, and suicide outside of martyrdom is one of the unhealthiest acts I can perform.

Nothing against your aesthetic but it's not my aesthetic. I mean, it is metal and badass, for sure, but I'd prefer psychedelics in a relaxing bed amongst family as my body naturally gives out if it must die this millennium.

You're right that the current legally permissible aesthetic is insufficient for everyone. But your aesthetic is also insufficient for everyone. If we want this to work for more people we should broaden the permissible aesthetics.

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