site banner
PaperclipPerfector  3mo ago (text post)   26577 thread views

Culture War Roundup for the week of March 23, 2026

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.

3
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Is he Elizabeth Holmes long lost brother? Same vibe.

Anyway couple of thoughts - yes killing yourself will make any kind of preservation easier. They could even start the process before you are dead. That is not a big break trough.

Anyway - there are a lot of lab mice in the world. If the technology was real - they could show something with a lab mice after it is preserved.

I think a lot of cryogenics relies on the idea that in a couple hundred years our technology will be so advanced that they will be able to bring people back from the cryogenic state. Therefore, they do not need to prove that we can bring a mouse back right now, with our current technology.

I think it's all crazy to assume we'll keep progressing the way we did in the last century and a half. We're going to go into a population crunch soon. We'll recover from it, but who knows what will happen to the cryogenic-ally frozen in the meantime?

I mean if you're gonna die anyway and you have the resources of a Walt Disney or whatever where you can essentially pay in perpetuity I don't see anything wrong with purchasing a lottery ticket. Even identifying the many issues with the hypothesis.

Yeah, the problem to me is more the Upper-Middle class Boomers who will give all their money first to the health care field, then to the cryogenics field, leaving little to their grandkids. But also because trusts are hard unless you have 100 million to make it worth it, all their money will be gone quickly and their corpse will be left rotting.

And then this current comment thread, killing yourself early for cryogenics is also a bad idea.

It really doesn't cost that much around 25k for most and Alcor the more expensive option is around 100k. That's a decent chunk of change but it's also around the price of a new car and most people pay with life insurance anyway.

That is not enough to pay for an active freezer with VRLA UPSs (with batteries being swapped out every five years), generator backups, and annual maintenance checkups from qualified technicinas in perpetuity.

They're being sold a bill of goods that will quickly become not worth it.

That's because they don't use an active freezer they use a dewar full of liquid nitrogen. And the money isn't drawn on it's invested in the market and only returns are used for costs.

You still need people to maintain those so that they don't explode.

Sure and Alcor and the Cryonics institute are non profits with open financials you can see how they've been running for more than 50 years and both have enough money in their patient care funds to run indefinitely as long as the stock market exists.

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


Recommended Posts And Communities

Recommended Realtime Chats