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.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
the """AI""" doesn't hate slurs more than genocide, that's a fundamental misunderstanding of GPT-3. it's just word vomit that's been trained to look like its "woke"
you clearly didn't read that substack blogger's blog post then. they were whining about how liberals secretly think that pronouns is worse than genocide. if you're going to assert article content, make sure its at least somewhat in the vague direction of truth
no i was just calling your position (and indeed the position of the article's author) terminally online and a pretty blatant strawman. as i would also do if it came from a liberal pov gasping that conservatives would rather nuke ppl than say that trans lives matter
You're retreating into insipid pedantry? The blog post was brought up for what it says about how ai has been programmed to promote liberal shibboleths so strongly that it results in craziness. I was applying that to the current topic more directly, as is easy to figure out if you aren't being obtuse to win an internet argument. And I know you know what I meant because...
Oh, look at that, you pieced it together by the last paragraph when you started calling my position the same as Hanania's. Did I redirect my assertion towards the truth when you hit enter? It's fascinating watching an argument evolve so rapidly that it not only changes mid-post but has, since the beginning of this discussion, done a complete 180! You went from a starting position of "the stuff mentioned in this blog post isn't unique to liberals, everyone does it!" to "you and the blog author and anyone else who thinks like this is terminally online!" in less than 5 posts, all by tackling strawmen you set up yourself. I'd have stuck with abstracting personally.
please spare me the random thesarsusposting, it's annoying.
yeah and that blog post is stupid as shit because of...
these aren't inconsistent positions
people of all different backgrounds both simultaneously
know and accept that genocide is bad and is even worse than a thing
have a more visceral reaction to that same thing
the fact that you don't know that is a symptom of the aforementioned terminal onlineness. or are you the type of person to go to someone who lost their pet and be like "yeah you have it bad but there are a bunch of kids dying in africa right now" or something?
no you. you're the one who set up the "boo outgroup" strawman!
I chose those words deliberately, you tried to catch me out by pretending my wording wasn't specific enough and you didn't understand what I meant - which is pedantry, and it was thoughtless and cliched and contradicted by the rest of your post - which is insipid.
You can call me a wordcel, but I like using a variety of words - I think language is beautiful, and I appreciate the poetry of a well constructed sentence. I even enjoy encountering a word I haven't seen before and learning about it. I think that's probably a fairly common opinion among motters. If you needed a thesaurus for the words insipid and pedantry you should bookmark a good thesaurus site for when you are browsing the motte, because it's only going to get so much worse.
Also you should probably tone down the antagonism or you are going to get modded.
not deliberately enough! your word choice was meaningless as your argument (which you have failed to argue) is based on strawmen. calling that out is fair, esepcially as its against the rules here
oh don't be mistaken, i wouldn't dignify you by calling you one unless you had actually demonstrated you could use those words correctly. using random words with no regard for their meaning isn't wordceling, it's just being pseudointellectual
You wanna have a slapfight, fine, but don't do this wikipedia shit. Keep it personal.
you do realize this place does have such rules right? it isn't intended to be an echo chamber
I believe you have largely trespassed against the rules. I don't report you because I have an even more pronounced free speech philosophy than the mods. Even for people who try to call the mods to slap their slapfight opponent for them.
i'm reminding our friend of this forum's rules because this isn't intended to be a free speech forum... especially since he claims to dislike hypocrisy so much.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link