I mean I think the assumption that the phone and couch are actually more fun than anything one could do is a bit suspect. My belief is that screens are a sort of hyperstimulous— that the version of whatever you happen to be doing on that screen is more immediately stimulating than the same version of that activity off the screen. But I don’t think that’s fun. I don’t think that the average person derives more entertainment and value from those versions than they would from the screenless version. They wouldn’t necessarily choose freely to sit on the couch and socialize on X over going out with friends for a coffee or something. They wouldn’t necessarily find playing some basketball game on Xbox over going to the gym with a couple of friends and a ball better and more entertaining. Instead, the screen is something that provides the high points of the experience without the things that make it less accessible.
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.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
I mean I think the assumption that the phone and couch are actually more fun than anything one could do is a bit suspect. My belief is that screens are a sort of hyperstimulous— that the version of whatever you happen to be doing on that screen is more immediately stimulating than the same version of that activity off the screen. But I don’t think that’s fun. I don’t think that the average person derives more entertainment and value from those versions than they would from the screenless version. They wouldn’t necessarily choose freely to sit on the couch and socialize on X over going out with friends for a coffee or something. They wouldn’t necessarily find playing some basketball game on Xbox over going to the gym with a couple of friends and a ball better and more entertaining. Instead, the screen is something that provides the high points of the experience without the things that make it less accessible.
More options
Context Copy link