site banner
PaperclipPerfector  4d ago (text post)   2387 thread views

Small-Scale Question Sunday for June 21, 2026

Do you have a dumb question that you're kind of embarrassed to ask in the main thread? Is there something you're just not sure about?

This is your opportunity to ask questions. No question too simple or too silly.

Culture war topics are accepted, and proposals for a better intro post are appreciated.

3
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

This is a dumb "question" I'm just flabbergasted in a low key situation. Going to Mexico for my wife's friend's wedding. Taking my small kids, gonna be something...

Happens to be down in Mexico for Mexico's first World Cup knock out match. I don't like soccer it's for the poor's but this is falls under "few in a life time opportunities" in my mind. The one guy I kind of know on the trip turned me down going out to watch the game (at a bar, or sport garden) because he hates crowds and sports. I've always struggled not to judge this guy as a loser (sulks around and whines a lot), this really doesn't help. Literally I don't think any other person I know would turn down an invite like this. Am I being too harsh?

I mean, how close-knit a group is it? If I were going with my SO, who I know is significantly more into spectator sports than I am, and she pushed me to, I would grit my teeth and go. If it were a big group of people who vaguely know each other, and some guy in the group who I "kind of know" asked me, even if he had nobody else to go with - yeah, I would wiggle out with an excuse. It's not like he can't go to the game by himself! Maybe he will even make some like-minded friends there.

To pass something like normative judgement, you really have to disentangle the question:

  • How unreasonable do you think is it to generally dislike spectator sports (at least in person)?

  • If you dislike them as above, how unreasonable do you think is it to not go to one anyway when such a "few in a life time opportunity" presents itself?

  • If you are unswayed by the opportunity as above, how unreasonable is it to refuse to "take one for the team" and go to make it easier for another person who really wants to go to do so? How does this depend on the degree of familiarity with the other person, and how much worse off they would be if you refuse?

  • How unreasonable do the three things above have to get before it becomes reasonable for you (the other person) to exercise some form of social pressure to punish them for defecting?

He’s the husband of my wife’s best friend. I went to his wedding, helped his soon-to-be sister-in-law move with him, and I’m obviously going to his sister-in-law’s wedding. My own wedding was held at his in-laws’ house. His father-in-law just texted me late last night inviting me to a mezcal tasting tonight in preparation for the trip. There's a social question, do I stand up my trivia team tonight to grab drinks with the very wealthy guy and partake of his crazy expensive alcohol collection?

I’d be completely fine going solo, but I doubt he knows that. If the roles were reversed, I would consider it an obligation to at least make an appearance under similar circumstances.

The actual event itself is a fairly minor thing in my mind. Like being close to totality for an eclipse and not making a relatively low effort to go watch it. Being in Wisconsin and not having a cheese curd. Being in Hawaii and not going to a beach. These aren't moral failing but I'm going to squint at you.

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