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.
- 146
- 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 -
Here's everything I read in January 2026, ordered from most to least interesting. I posted this on /r/slatestarcodex earlier, but figured the overlap between here and there is small enough that it would be of some value to post here as well.
Well, some of these are a bit interesting. If you don't mind a few off-the-cuff takes--
These were interesting, obviously mostly well-known.
I do want to comment on the astrology thing though. I think I'd struggle to take a partner who used astrology as a means to talk about personality seriously. My view is that it's ludicrous, but moreso that it forces human personality into very silly boxes instead of using big-boy (girl?) words to actually talk about things in an organic manner. It suggests immaturity in emotional and social communication.
This tweet included in the essay was interesting to me:
That's actually a question that includes the answer -- the problem is that it's a way to communicate indirectly, and as the article says "super flexibly", without actually committing to making a statement. That's one of the worst traits in a partner, from my point of view.
This comment on the article was interesting:
I love talking about values and hopes and dreams and goals. It's actually because I like talking about those things that I don't like astrology. I don't believe it's necessary or helpful to try to fit me, or you, into a star-sign box. If you're someone who likes to stay in a lot and is slow to trust someone, you can just say that. Have an adult conversation with me about who you are and who I am. I don't believe in "indirectly" communicating about "how we'd fit together," I believe in directly communicating it. I kind of want to make a joke on the "I don't consent" Jesus meme where the third player is "literally the observable universe." Don't bring galaxies into the bedroom, please!
I think tact is useful. But when I'm looking to share my life with someone, I want to know they can communicate about desires and preferences in a straightforward, clear, and reasonable manner. Astrology as an interest suggests a way of looking at life as a kind of following the wind, at the mercy of (literally) astronomical forces, and that leads me to believe someone is flighty and doesn't fully take responsibility for the outcomes of their own life.
I also disagree with this:
"Dungeons and Dragons lore" or "fantasy football statistics" are generally not means by which people aim to understand themselves or their place in the social universe. The closest equivalent is actually if some guy tried asking his date about her DnD moral alignment -- I think most people would find that cringe. I'd be happy to listen to a date talk about her interest in makeup, or fashion, especially if she could forgive my ignorance -- but not astrology. It's just a different kind of a thing.
But what's most interesting to me is that the article ignores the biggest and actual reason you're single: the social people aren't available, and the available people aren't social, because they're on their phones scrolling TikTok because fewer and fewer people participate in voluntary social activity, especially after college. It's almost a meme how many times I've been told "I'm boring, sorry," by women whose hobbies included watching YouTube videos and eating dinner, alone, at home. I don't have any problem with that! But that's not exactly a social calendar that lends itself to meeting interesting people. If my girlfriend and I hadn't met each other at the right time, I'd probably be single too. And so would she.
That said, the main thing I have to say about astrology is I took an astronomy class in college for a natural sciences credit, and at the end of the course two girls had a short discussion in the class group chat, where they said:
I don't know why we're giving bachelor's degrees to people who can't distinguish between astrology and astronomy, but that's a different issue.
I'm a Linux user (btw), but I do have to admit I'm fringe.
Well, I guess I just had a couple thoughts as I actually selected what random neuron firings deserved being typed out. Anyway.
Wait - are they calling you boring, or themselves? I've heard of a stereotype of some single women who badly want to be entertained despite being utterly unengaged themselves, but in the stereotype they're not self-aware about it.
When credentials weren't so important, efficiency made it seem sensible for teaching and student evaluation to be done by the same institution. Once credentials' importance skyrocketed, game theory concerns became paramount, but the mistake is now too ubiquitous to change.
I use Windows and OSX too, but I do everything I can on Linux because I prefer the user interface.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link