Be advised: this thread is not for serious in-depth discussion of weighty topics (we have a link for that), this thread is not for anything Culture War related. This thread is for Fun. You got jokes? Share 'em. You got silly questions? Ask 'em.
- 129
- 2
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
- Courtesy
- Content
- Engagement
- When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
- Proactively provide evidence in proportion to how partisan and inflammatory your claim might be.
- Accept temporary bans as a time-out, and don't attempt to rejoin the conversation until it's lifted.
- Don't attempt to build consensus or enforce ideological conformity.
- Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
- The Wildcard Rule
- The Metarule

Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
"All" was two people, one of whose first reaction was to beat the other to the ground after finding out about that last twist, so I wouldn't say he was 100% okay.
The operative who orchestrated it was 100% okay with it, sure: "And if your conscience is bothering you, you should soothe it with the knowledge that you may have just saved the entire Alpha Quadrant, and all it cost was the life of one Romulan senator, one criminal... and the self-respect of one Starfleet officer. I don't know about you, but I'd call that a bargain." Best quote in the show.
But the full reason it was one of the best episodes ever was watching that furious Starfleet officer struggle to become okay enough with it: "So, this is a huge victory for the good guys! This may even be the turning point of the entire war! There's even a "Welcome to the Fight" party tonight in the wardroom!... So... I lied. I cheated. I bribed men to cover up the crimes of other men. I am an accessory to murder. But the most damning thing of all... I think I can live with it... And if I had to do it all over again... I would. Garak was right about one thing – a guilty conscience is a small price to pay for the safety of the Alpha Quadrant. So, I will learn to live with it...Because I can live with it...I can live with it. Computer – erase that entire personal log."
The thing about the Trolley Problem is that in its classic formulation it feels simple enough: you pull the lever and the trolley kills one person, but thanks to you the trolley didn't kill five. 5>1, yay you! But what if we replace the inanimate trolley with a conniving human being, and your push enables cold-blooded murder? What if you're only in a position to give and take lives because you took oaths you've now spat upon? What if there was nothing but the fog of war to inform you about how many people were really going to be hurt on each track, or about how badly? What if you can't even ask another trustworthy soul about whether you did the right thing, because the utilitarian decision's effectiveness relies on your continuing ability and willingness to lie about it? Is this still a situation where cold utilitarian calculation trumps virtue ethics? Would you go full Kant and immediately reveal the truth to everyone, damn the consequences?
Okay ... I haven't actually watched all of DS9 in decades ... but when was this? How did I forget this? Was it bad enough that I've actually blocked it out?
Re: Worf Dax scene
He's probably thinking of the cold open to "Sons and Daughters", though the scene sounds more like the one at the end of "Looking for Par'Mach In All The Wrong Places". Idk, there's several Dax Worf scenes, including one with Ezri in "Penumbra".
Rereading the post, I think it's implied that it's not in "In the Pale Moonlight" which of course cold opens with:
Which bookends the ending you allude to:
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link