site banner
naraburns  nihil supernum  2d ago (text post)   Edited 2d ago   2972 thread views

Quality Contributions Report for August 2026

This is the Quality Contributions Roundup. It showcases interesting and well-written comments and posts from the period covered. If you want to get an idea of what this community is about or how we want you to participate, look no further (except the rules maybe--those might be important too).

As a reminder, you can nominate Quality Contributions by hitting the report button and selecting the "Actually A Quality Contribution!" option. Additionally, links to all of the roundups can be found in the wiki of /r/theThread which can be found here. For a list of other great community content, see here.

These are mostly chronologically ordered, but I have in some cases tried to cluster comments by topic so if there is something you are looking for (or trying to avoid), this might be helpful.

Quality Contributions to the Main Motte

@birb_cromble:

@Tanista:

@Muninn:

@self_made_human:

@DiscourseMagnus:

@gattsuru:

Contributions for the week of August 3, 2026

@Shakes:

@FtttG:

@quiet_NaN:

@iprayiam3:

@georgioz:

@birb_cromble:

@Tretiak:

@100ProofTollBooth:

@YoungAchamian:

@Aapje58:

Contributions for the week of August 10, 2026

@gattsuru:

@GBRK:

@Thoroughlygruntled:

@FtttG:

@zoink:

@georgioz:

@JeSuisCharlie:

Contributions for the week of August 17, 2026

@faceh:

@Shakes:

@ratherblather:

@Shirayuki3:

Contributions for the week of August 24, 2026

@hanikrummihundursvin:

@faceh:

@Shakes:

@RandomRanger:

@netstack:

@FtttG:

Contributions for the week of August 31, 2026

@thejdizzler:

5
Top Bottom Old Controversial Comments
Jump in the discussion.

No email address required.

Homeopathy is a stupid example for two reasons:

  1. It has no moral valence and so whether or not to believe in homeopathy is a purely empirical claim. Take something instead like abortion. Under what conditions we should allow abortions is much more of a claim about our underlying axiomatic systems. It seems quite obvious that exposure to different media/arguments can drastically change the typical person's views on abortion, and even for the particularly strong willed/thoughtful will nudge the person's opinion.

  2. Up-to-lizardman-constant, no one believes in the "strong homeopathy hypothesis" that diluting chemicals with water makes them more powerful. But there are many "weaker homeopathy hypotheses" that I'll bet I can convince you of: Consider your typical hypocondriac that goes to a doctors office and always demands getting some sort of medication. This person will experience lots of negative side effects of medication. Their health will be meaningfully improved by becoming convinced that homeopathic medicine works and taking those "medications" instead of actual prescription medications. One type of maximally persuasive argument about homeopathy would argue for a weaker hypothesis like this, but you could just state that this isn't actually arguing for homeopathy, and so is axiomatically not the maximally persuasive argument.

One type of maximally persuasive argument about homeopathy would argue for a weaker hypothesis like this, but you could just state that this isn't actually arguing for homeopathy, and so is axiomatically not the maximally persuasive argument.

This is correct so far as it goes, but I reject the implication that "isn't actually arguing for homeopathy" is some sort of minor quibble which doesn't affect the point.

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