Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?
This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.
Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
what is the philosophical origin of "no consensus-building"? This rule describes exactly what I want out of an intellectual community but this community is the first place I've seen it put this way in a really clear and succinct way. I'm curious where it comes from. I know very little of the rationalist etc. lore, but I'm also curious about what philosophy writing it could come from, which I could imagine being Isaiah Berlin pluralism etc. but possibly others?
People can point to a consensus that already exists, and no one is going to object, but building a consensus is smuggling your controversial opinions in the shared, uncontroversial context of a post hoping they will evade scrutiny. Well executed it's a great propaganda tool, but in a forum where people are expected to lay out their opinions clearly for debate, it's dishonest and counterproductive, as if someone spots the smuggled opinion and cares to debate it honestly, they will need to have you unwind that argument back to that assumption, which wastes everyone's time. It also, as Primaprimaprima mentions, feels very hostile and unwelcoming when you have it done to you.
Yeah what you and prima said aligns with my thoughts, but it seems like you'd expect this wisdom to be in a philosophy text or blogpost somewhere and expanded upon
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link