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 -
I think my objection is a bit different from yours. I actually want the old EA back - the one that would make a spreadsheet, honestly attempt to evaluate criminal justice reform, and then say "sorry we don't like cause B1:B/C1:C -> sort put it at the bottom".
Assuming you think AI risk is real, why is this anything other than absolutely the right thing to do?
This is a very bad criticism of EAs who actually use spreadsheets. It's like saying "because some growth companies are getting 2x growth yearly, no company should ever do share buybacks." But the reasoning fails once you actually encode it in a spreadsheet - once the gains from consumption exceed the future projected gains from investment, you stop investing and spend.
Um, that is very much not what has happened with any EA org yet. I think you're describing college endowments.
Your disagreement with EA and mine are quite different. I don't object to EA because it's weird and non-mainstream, or because spreadsheets lead to different results than zeitgeist informed intuition. I think that's what is right about older EA. My lament is that the visible people claiming the title of EA seem to have mostly given that up.
I am not lamenting that I hate EA and always have because "ugh weirdos in fedoras". My lament is that I liked it before it became cool.
More options
Context Copy link