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 -
Trying to steelman you here: try "importance" or "relevance", maybe? Perhaps literally nobody thinks that a person necessarily has higher status or higher value just because they have higher intelligence, and they definitely don't think that a person has higher moral status or value for that reason. But high intelligence (at least if combined with high agency, not exclusionary of social intelligence, etc etc) is a force multiplier for morality - a moral person is more likely to provide others with more beneficial externalities if they have the capabilities to do so, and an immoral person is likely to be more of a threat to others if they have the capabilities to do so. The "mad scientist" is mostly a fictional trope, but when e.g. the Nazis or later the Soviets were ahead of us in rocketry, we didn't conclude that shucks, they must have been more moral people than us after all, we were horrified by the implied danger.
In the phrase "Talking about intelligence points toward your racism" here, "your" was probably intended as the generic you, not the second-person pronoun. This is simply an explanation for why talking too much about intelligence is taboo: it has a history of being used to excuse bigotry in a way that doesn't apply to factors like height, so even when someone talks about it in a non-bigoted way there's still naturally some suspicion that that's just a "cover story".
This isn't a personal attack.
More options
Context Copy link