site banner
ZorbaTHut  1yr ago (text post)   44910 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of September 5, 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.

105
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Hah, same here. Once we have lab grown meat that's better than real meat we'll both be happy.

More elaborately: there is no moral value in the world outside of human flourishing. Morality is not a characteristic of the universe, a cold hard fact we can measure with a morality device; it is a value we assign through our own personal determinations.

Animals don't have rights. Animals have whatever we give them and nothing else. My cat is valuable because I've got a personal bond with my cat. A cow isn't because I don't and want to eat it. In a different life, maybe I'd have a personal bond with a cow, and not eat it. But that's not because cows have the right to not be eaten, it's because I have a personal, one-on-one connection to that cow specifically.

Why do we eat meat? Because we like meat. That we like it is justification enough, because humanity alone is the arbiter of right and wrong.

Why do we eat meat? Because we like meat. That we like it is justification enough, because humanity alone is the arbiter of right and wrong.

Why use 'we' here? Humanity is divided on this issue or else there would not be a debate. If you want to say 'meat eaters alone are the arbiters of right and wrong' that would be more precise and would sound pretty cool, but I'm not sure it settles anything.

There isn't a real debate and humanity isn't divided on the issue. Vegetarians are a small minority.

While vegetarianism might still be a minority position, I can't help but notice that lots of countries have legislation in place regulating animal welfare. So it seems to me that a non-trivial percentage supports restricting the suffering of animals.

I don't advocate torturing animals, but that's because if you get off on torture there's probably something dangerous in your psyche, not because animals have the right to happiness.

if you get off on torture there's probably something dangerous in your psyche

But why would this be so, if it really is a matter of moral indifference? Why would it suggest anything worse about someone's psyche than, say, playing violent video games, or for that matter something totally neutral and unrelated like doing pushups, singing, etc.?

There's first principle morals, which I assume almost no one uses in daily life, and there is aesthetical morals. Animals have aesthetical appeal. If you would torture an animal, that signals your aesthetical moral compass is off the societal baseline. I think there's a reason why "tortured animals as a kid" is a common trope for psychopaths.

I think there's a reason why "tortured animals as a kid" is a common trope for psychopaths.

I was wondering whether this was a real thing or just a fictional trope. Seems like it's real:

When the science of behavioural profiling began to emerge in the 1970s, one of the most consistent findings reported by the FBI profiling unit was that childhood IATC [intentional animal torture and cruelty] appeared to be a common behaviour among serial murderers and rapists (i.e., those with psychopathic traits characterized by impulsivity, selfishness, and lack of remorse).

But psychology is tricky, especially with things like this, because it's hard to tell what's really human nature versus what's really social conditioning. If there weren't a widespread sentiment in our society that torturing animals is bad, would the psychopathy correlation still hold? I suspect not, based on a hunch that other societies (present and past) don't have such attitudes about torturing animals and yet aren't filled with serial killers. (Admittedly I don't have time to look up examples right now.)

Returning to the topic of vegetarianism, the idea that animal cruelty is bad for psychological reasons has the curious consequence that ethical vegetarianism becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy - if you believe that eating meat is morally equivalent to inflicting suffering on an animal, then it's a sign of psychopathy for you to do it, but not for someone else who doesn't believe that!

More comments

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