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 -
Destiny is a fine enough debater. at least the two or three I've seen him in, most front of mid was the Israel debate on Fridman. He's not a one in a billion talent but compared to most pundants he handles himself well. To be a good debater you do need to actually handle yourself well in a real time discussion. If there was a glut of people in the rhetoric or philosophy department that could handle themselves well in this kind of debate they'd be able to make a splash in the debate scene, which is fairly open.
William Lane Craig has been doing this his entire life. That’s what debate is. Destiny understands zero about debate, because the fool doesn’t [and probably can’t] read academic literature. Norman Finkelstein trolling him was always hilarious to watch.
If you thought finkleestein looked good in that debate then I don't know what to tell you. "Debate is about seriously handling ideas, here see how epic it is that a good debator played name calling games". I don't understand how your mind works.
Finkelstein is a first rate scholar of the region who’s recognized as such. Destiny is an idiot who thinks he’s on the level because he can print out Wikipedia pages. He got treated exactly the way he should’ve been.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link