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.
- 117
- 3
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 -
Do I "believe" in therapists?
I'm being honest. No. I don't go to therapy, anymore, and haven't in a long time. When I did go, the first two therapists were useless, and the third, who happened to be young, pretty and sensible, had me falling in love with counter-transference so hard it probably counts as remittance.
But therapy? I believe in that, in the sense that it works.
Empirically, on objective based metrics? It works! Works well! Or well enough, since some form of therapy often beats drugs as the first line intervention. CBT for depression, DBT for BPD (which I was disdainful of, until I saw the objective metrics), the list goes on.
I'm in the slightly awkward position of not wanting to go to therapists while being quite solid at it myself. Learning shit like CBT and IPT is a core part of the psychiatry curriculum here. I've been told I'm good at the job.
My distaste for it is slightly irrational. I simply prefer drugs in most circumstances, far less finicky. Not as many soft-factors. You pop something and you get better. Hopefully.
Whereas finding a good therapist is far harder. They don't come with individual RCTs or dose effect curves. Many of them are useless. Some of them are outright counter-productive. Some of these criticisms are also fairly leveled against the medication.
In general, I think men should go to male therapists. They're usually more no-nonsense, less touchy-feely. Men seem to prefer something closer to a life coach than an auntie who'll sip tea with you while you sob.
More speculatively, you need a therapist who is at least roughly as smart as you. Ideally smarter. Part of the job is analyzing your psyche, figuring out what makes you tick. There are a lot of midwits out there. They're more likely to regurgitate the same lines, offer the same old canned saws.
More options
Context Copy link