site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  1yr ago (text post)   36238 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of October 24, 2022

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.

20
Top Bottom New Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

from there on you might call it principle or just spite.

Thanks for answering honestly. I get this sense from most educated anti-vaxxers I talk to. I don't feel the same way but I understand how people would, and definitely think that the lockdowns were insane and over the top.

I never saw the social pressure and the social ruin coming until was already too late

Yeah luckily I was organizing some far-left local dance groups that totally freaked out - helped me see the writing on the wall very early. I wonder if people who don't associate with leftists just didn't understand how bad it would be?

Although apparently it's not very popular here, my calculus was more like - is it worth destroying all these important relationships I've built over the years, or risk taking a relatively untested vaccine? The choice was clear for me.

You mention principle, what is the principle here? If vaccine safety wasn't a problem, do you place your right to avoid government mandated drugs higher than social values?

For me the principle involved in refusing the vaccine was simple- white hot rage at people who took the pandemic seriously. The hypochondriacs of the world had already infringed against me, and now they dared to lash out at me for not dancing along to their tune on imagined risks?

There were a lot of deaths. What is your standard for taking a risk seriously?

I wonder if people who don't associate with leftists just didn't understand how bad it would be?

Quite possibly. I associate with them plenty, but I figured this was something that people were still allowed to make up their own mind about. Yet another topic on which some may have opinions they consider morally significant, but which in the end remains a private matter. Like electric cars, or vegetarianism, or what kind of companies you buy from.

You mention principle, what is the principle here? If vaccine safety wasn't a problem, do you place your right to avoid government mandated drugs higher than social values?

There are several principles at work. One I might charitably call bayesian thinking, or less charitably being a stubborn ass who'd rather trust his lying eyes than any number of wise mouths speaking words of wisdom. Another is not succumbing to unjustified social pressure so as to not validate people and trends who would wield it. Another is not playing along with government policies I disagree with, to the extend that I can afford to. I could come up with more, but really, spite is the most of it. And yeah, I draw something of an arbitrary line at anything being mandated to go under my skin, or be carried on my person, or anything other than lie at home in a drawer where I can forget about it. That just seems like the government overstepping its bounds, severely, and not something to be done unless there were no other way. And in the case of covid anything down to "do nothing at all and come through it fine" was another and a preferable way.

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