site banner

Culture War Roundup for the week of January 30, 2023

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.

13
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

What you seem to be talking about is the overemphasis of structured analytical thought over common sense thought. This seems to be very similar to what Nassim Taleb says about the Intellectual Yet Idiots.

The best example is Taleb's hypothetical interaction between Dr. John and Fat Tony:

Taleb: “I am going to flip this fair coin 100 times, and after the 99th toss, I want each of you to tell me the probability of the 100th being heads. You should know that each toss is independent and the that the coin is fair.”

Taleb flips the coin 99 times and each of the 99 tosses results in a heads.

Taleb: “Now before, I toss the coin for the 100th time, I want each of you to tell me the probability of heads on this next toss.”

Dr. John using principles of probability arrives to the wrong answer, and Fat Tony using common sense arrives to the correct answer.

Your example of mask mandates is a good example of how Dr. John types tend to favor institutional wisdom over common sense, I did argue with many of these types what evidences was there of masks actually working, and no one ever gave me a definitive study. A lot provided this "study" An evidence review of face masks against COVID-19, but when I read it, it says the current studies don't show conclusive evidence, and this paper does is develop a model that shows how effective masks would be if certain percentage of the population uses them given that they do work.

The model actually shows that if mask do not work, 100% of the population using them do not matter.

Now, I'm in the opposite camp, my common sense tells me masks should work, not in protecting me, but in protecting others. I have seen no study proving that though. I used masks not because I knew the worked, but because I didn't know that they didn't. Small price to pay just in case they did work I guess.


I do not think the role intuition has been properly assessed though. In my entry My intuition about intuition, I try to build a case as to why I think it's much more important than people realize. However, I suspect Dr. John types are going to be biased against intuition and in favor of analytical thinking, because obviously if they are good at it, it has to be more important.