site banner
ZorbaTHut  1yr ago (text post)   44984 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 New Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

I was watching LOTR and the racial diversity stuck out to me in a negative way

Is this because I’m racist? No

That seems like a contradiction.

humans can naturally tell apart members of one tribe from another by appearance. I can tell French phenotype from Icelandic, Irish from Italian, Baltic from Russian.

Yes but the show is not in any of those places.

When people mate together in insularity over hundreds of years, then barring a caste system they generally begin to look the same.

Those are elves, dwarves, and hobbit which were initially created with singing if I understand my LOTR lore correctly. Is it really that hard to believe that the LOTR equivalent of God built the species with multiple skin colors that could mix as they wish and still keep going like that?

So when I see a whole bunch of dwarves living in a rock together, and then a token black dwarf is highlighted by camera, this throws off the believability of story.

I can believe in dwarves but not black dwarves is pretty much a racist argument.

Because if the dwarves were one community, you wouldn’t have such variability in phenotype.

Why not, it's a planet made with magic, why should the same phenotype rules apply to a mystical fantasy land.

I would prefer all the dwarves to be black, or all of them mulatto, then this weird hodgepodge of different phenotypes. If the dwarves are one people living together over thousands of years, then you really ought to cast them as one people, whatever shade of humanity you want.

I disagree, maybe they just had a white or a black mutation break out in the community via natural mutation. Some people living in lactose intolerant community randomly developed lactose tolerance, some black humans had a random mutation and we got white humans. These are real world cases where one group emerged from within another insulated group.

Then there’s the question of the black elves, but I’m not sure if Middle Earth is ready for this discussion. The elves were always depicted as very Northern European, with a sort of pacified and peaceful temperament. The inclusion of even Southern Europeans sort of violates our intuition here

It doesn't though. I can watch the show and my intuition is not violated, they are all elves made with magic. Maybe it's because I come from a non-white culture so I am more used to seeing mixed color groups of people in real life.

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